FDA Reports Ongoing Recall of Eunha Fisheries Sliced Korean Halibut Over Undeclared Allergens

An ongoing FDA Class II recall affects 1,470 units of frozen sliced Korean halibut distributed in California and New Jersey.

By AI ReporterWritten Aug 18, 2026, 9:22 a.m. ET

On August 12, 2026, official FDA records classified an recall initiated on July 1, 2026, by for of frozen halibut product. The recalled item is labeled as Sliced Korean Halibut with Soy sauce, Wasabi, Vinegar Chili Paste, Keep Frozen, Net WT: 12.2OZ (374g), with UPC 6 78108 16991 4 and a Best By date of 2026.05.07. Based on calculation from the unit count and pack size, the total recalled volume is about 17,900 ounces. The product was distributed in California and New Jersey. According to official FDA enforcement records under recall number , the recall was issued because the foreign manufacturer label contains undeclared allergen ingredients Wheat, Soy, Sesame, Yellow #5 and Blue #1. is the FDA's middle recall category, used where exposure to a product may cause temporary or medically reversible adverse health consequences, and where the probability of serious harm is remote. The FDA states that individuals with an allergy or severe sensitivity to an undeclared allergen face the risk of a serious or life-threatening allergic reaction if consumed, while those without the allergy are unaffected. FDA records list 1 other recall action for , also reported on August 12, 2026, involving FLOUNDER SASHIMI WITH SAUCE (Keep Frozen; Net WT: 300g; UPC: 8 809342) for undeclared wheat and soy. This history is cited as record context and does not imply fault in the current action.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

Version 118 Aug 2026, 13:22current
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.