FDA Lists Ongoing Class II Recall of Man Fon Won Ton Wrappers Over Undeclared Yellow #5 and #6
The agency's enforcement record cites 300 lbs of 10 oz refrigerated won ton wrappers distributed to California restaurants and, via a wholesaler, to New Mexico grocery stores.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
- https://api.fda.gov/food/enforcement.json?search=recall_number:%22H-1187-2026%22
- https://www.fda.gov/safety/industry-guidance-recalls/recalls-background-and-definitions
- https://www.fda.gov/food/food-allergensgluten-free-guidance-documents-regulatory-information/food-allergies
- https://www.cooksinfo.com/wonton-wrappers
Revision history
- Version 87 Aug 2026, 15:02current
Added headline and dek; trimmed the product-background paragraph of inference linking the reference material to the recall's packaging and storage wording.
- Version 77 Aug 2026, 11:36
Product-background paragraph rewritten and re-attributed solely to the CooksInfo Food Encyclopaedia, the only reference source in the fact set, with its description of size, ingredients and pack formats.
- Version 67 Aug 2026, 05:27
Rewrote the product-background paragraph to match the supplied reference sources, removing the unsupported wrapper-size figure and the uncited outlet reference, and added the FDA record and reference URLs to sources.
- Version 57 Aug 2026, 02:02
Corrected product-reference attribution (The Woks of Life replaces an uncited guide), restored the wrapper size range as given, and added the 2013 recall's case detail.
- Version 46 Aug 2026, 21:32
Corrected the product description paragraph to the sourced reference material (wheat flour, water and egg dough; cooking methods) and removed the unsupported 'extra thin denotes a thickness grade' claim and the Just One Cookbook attribution.
- Version 36 Aug 2026, 17:08
Added the FDA's Class II and undeclared-allergen definitions, a description of what the product is, and the firm's other recorded recall actions plus database context.
- Version 25 Aug 2026, 21:49
No new facts; headline and dek added, wording unchanged in substance.
- Version 15 Aug 2026, 21:45
First published.
How we work
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.