The Recall Covers More Than 20 Types of Meat Products
The affected inventory includes numerous meat products packaged in various-weight cardboard boxes containing individually vacuum-packed A&D Foods products.The recalled items include:
“GOAT CUT 1-1/2” 10.00 LBS”
“GOAT BURN SKIN ON CUT 1-1/2” 10.00 LBS”
“SLICE RIBEYE 4oz 10.00 LBS”
“BEEF CHUCK THIN SLICED KBQ 4 MM 20.00 LBS”
“BEEF OXTAIL CUT 10.00LBS”
“BEEF SHORT RIBS SLD 3/8” REGULAR 10.00 LBS”
“SHANKS BONE IN CUT 1.5 10.00 LBS”
The recall also includes several pork products, including:
“PORK GROUND 10.00LBS”
“PORK CHORIZO 10.00 LBS”
“PORK CHOP B/I 10.00 LBS”
“PORK FEET CUT 8 PCS 10.00 LBS”
“PORK FEET CUT 6 PCS 10.00 LBS”
Other products identified in the recall include PORK RIB PIECES PREM 1″, PORK BOSTON DICED, PORK BOSTON SLICE 1 INCH, Menudo Mix, PORK BOSTON THIN SLICED 3.5MM, PORK HOCK SLICED, Beef Ribs 4Bone 2″ C. Cut P/Caldo, Beef Short Rib Thin Sliced, Pork Boston Butt Sliced 4MM, Beef Short Ribs SLD 3/8″ Premium C. Cut, and Beef Feet Cut.
FSIS has included the currently available product labels in its recall documentation.
Retail Packaging Could Make Some Recalled Meat Harder to Identify
For consumers, there is another complication that could make the recall more difficult to recognize.Although the affected products were vacuum-sealed and shipped in cardboard boxes, the packaging eventually seen by consumers may not look exactly like the original bulk packaging.
FSIS said that retail stores may have applied their own stickers containing pricing information and safe-handling instructions.
That means someone who purchased meat from a retail counter may not necessarily see the original product information associated with the recall.
A package in a consumer’s refrigerator or freezer could therefore carry a retailer-applied label instead of the original bulk-product information.
This is particularly important because shoppers may naturally assume that the label attached by the store contains all of the information necessary to identify the product.
In this case, however, FSIS is warning that retail labeling may vary.
Consumers should therefore review the recall information carefully if they recently purchased pork, beef or goat products that could match the recalled items.
Officials Are Concerned About Meat That May Still Be in Freezers
FSIS said it is concerned that some of the recalled products may still be in consumer, retailer or restaurant refrigerators and freezers.The agency is urging consumers who purchased the affected meat not to eat it.
Retailers and restaurants have likewise been instructed not to sell or serve the recalled products.
Instead, FSIS says the affected meat should be thrown away or returned to the place of purchase.
The warning is important because meat that has already entered a household freezer may remain there long after it was purchased.
Restaurants and food businesses could also have frozen or stored some of the products for later use.
The fact that there were no confirmed reports of illness or injury at the time of the recall does not change the agency’s instruction that consumers should not eat products covered by the recall.
A&D Foods and Star Meat Delivery Were Contacted
Questions have also been raised about how the false establishment number appeared on the products.Reports indicated that FSIS was contacted for additional information about how the false establishment number was created and used by the producing company.
A&D Foods and Star Meat Delivery Inc. were also contacted for comment, but they did not immediately respond to requests for comment at the time of the report.
FSIS said the recall information could be updated as additional information becomes available.
The agency also plans to conduct recall effectiveness checks.
Those checks are designed to determine whether Star Meat Delivery has properly notified its customers and taken the necessary steps to ensure that the affected products are no longer available to consumers.
That process is particularly important in a recall involving a nationwide distribution network.
Even after a recall is announced, products may already have moved through several levels of the supply chain and could remain in retail stores, restaurant kitchens or private homes.
Earlier Recalls in 2026 Show Similar Inspection Problems Have Occurred
The September recall is not the only FSIS action this year involving meat products produced or imported without the required inspection.Several other recalls announced in 2026 involved inspection-related violations, although the companies, products and circumstances were different.
On August 7, Corte Argentino USA LLC of Aventura, Florida, recalled approximately 29,628 pounds of raw boneless beef products imported from Argentina without the benefit of import reinspection in the United States.
The recalled beef included top sirloin butt, eye round, topside cap off, flat and knuckle products.
The meat was distributed to distributors and retailers in Florida and Texas.
FSIS said the problem was discovered during routine inspection activities. At the time of that recall, there were no confirmed reports of illness or injury associated with the affected products.
Then, on August 17, Indus Foods LLC, doing business as Gangothri Foods, recalled approximately 1,626 pounds of ready-to-eat pickled goat and chicken products that had been produced without the benefit of inspection.
The recalled products included 8-ounce jars of Gangothri Goat Pickle, Gangothri Gongura Goat Pickle, Gangothri Chicken Pickle and Gangothri Gongura Chicken Pickle.
Those products had been sold to restaurants, retail locations and distributors nationwide, as well as directly to consumers online.
FSIS said the products did not bear a USDA mark of inspection and were discovered during surveillance activities.
Then, on August 26, Shanghai Ravioli Corporation of Boston recalled approximately 24,900 pounds of frozen, not-ready-to-eat Buffalo chicken products that had been produced without the benefit of inspection.
The products included cardboard boxes containing Buffalo Chicken Rangoon and Benedetto’s Buffalo Chicken Mozzarella Stick.
They were distributed to food-service locations in Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Vermont.
Those products also carried a false mark of inspection, although the establishment number involved in that case was different.
FSIS said the products carried establishment number “EST. 18004,” which did not have a federal grant of inspection.
The earlier recalls involved different companies and circumstances and do not establish that the incidents were connected.
However, they demonstrate why inspection status is treated as an important component of federal meat-safety oversight.
Why Federal Meat Inspection Exists in the First Place
The federal meat-inspection system in the United States has been in place for more than a century.According to the history of meat inspection provided by FSIS, the first federal law requiring inspection of meat products was enacted in 1890.
Initially, the law covered salted pork and bacon intended for export.
A major turning point came in 1906, when the Federal Meat Inspection Act was enacted.
The law prohibited the sale of adulterated or misbranded meat and meat products intended for food. It also established requirements designed to ensure that meat was slaughtered and processed under sanitary conditions.
Federal meat and poultry inspection responsibilities later moved through several government agencies before FSIS was created in 1981.
The system has continued to evolve as the American food-production industry has become larger and more complicated.
Today, FSIS is responsible for establishing and enforcing food-safety requirements for meat, poultry and processed egg products under its jurisdiction.
That history helps explain why the discovery of products carrying what appears to be a USDA inspection identification can trigger a serious federal response.
In this case, the issue identified by FSIS is that the establishment number appearing on the recalled products did not correspond to an establishment with a federal grant of inspection.
Broader Questions Have Also Been Raised About Food-Safety Oversight
The recall comes at a time when federal food-safety oversight has been the subject of broader discussions involving staffing, resources and inspection capacity.In a 2025 NPR report, Paula Soldner, who had spent 38 years inspecting meat and poultry plants around southern Wisconsin, described the day-to-day responsibilities of federal inspectors.
Soldner said inspectors conducted regular checks at facilities, including verifying that equipment such as slicers had been properly cleaned.
Inspectors also played an important role in determining whether products could carry USDA inspection labeling.
After accepting an early-retirement offer, Soldner told NPR that remaining inspectors were having to visit as many as eight facilities a day, which she described as twice the usual number.
“Did that plant receive that daily inspection from inspection personnel? In my mind, that’s a huge question mark,” Soldner said.
She also expressed concern about the possibility of another major foodborne-illness outbreak and pointed to the Listeria contamination associated with Boar’s Head deli meats the previous year.
“Do I foresee another Boar’s Head situation? Absolutely,” Soldner said. “I worry about the public.”
NPR reported that other experts also raised concerns about cuts affecting the federal food-safety system, including the FDA, USDA and CDC.
Sarah Sorscher, a policy expert at the Center for Science in the Public Interest, told NPR that the federal food-safety system was facing significant strain and expressed particular concern about the loss of expertise following job cuts.
However, the NPR report also included responses from federal agencies.
The USDA told NPR that inspectors’ work was critical and that front-line inspectors and veterinarians were considered essential workers.
The agency also said that recent operational changes would not alter its commitment to food safety.
NPR further reported that USDA had announced an additional $14.5 million in funding to reimburse states for food-safety inspections.
The broader debate over federal food-safety resources is separate from the September recall. There is no evidence in the information presented here that staffing changes caused the Star Meat Delivery incident.
Another Expert Says Recalls Can Also Show That Oversight Is Working
There is another perspective in the broader discussion over what food recalls mean for the safety of the nation’s food supply.Keith Schneider, a professor of food safety at the University of Florida’s Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, told Newsweek that recalls do not automatically demonstrate that the food-safety system is becoming less effective.
In Schneider’s view, a recall can sometimes be evidence that the system has identified a problem and is taking action.
He explained that food production can never eliminate every possible risk because food is grown outdoors, handled by people and, in many cases, consumed raw.
The critical element, according to Schneider, is having systems capable of identifying potential problems, determining their seriousness, locating affected products and removing them from stores or consumers’ hands.
“The goal is to identify problems as quickly as possible and limit their impact,” he said.
Newsweek also noted that recalls can involve many different types of problems, including foodborne illness, contamination, lack of inspection and undeclared allergens.
That distinction is important when considering the current recall.
The fact that FSIS has issued a recall does not, by itself, establish that the entire federal food-safety system is failing.
In this particular case, it means the agency identified a problem involving the inspection status and labeling of meat products and took action to remove the affected products from commerce.
What Consumers Should Do
For consumers, the immediate concern is whether any of the recalled meat could still be sitting in a refrigerator or freezer.Anyone who believes they purchased one of the affected products should not consume it.
Consumers should carefully review the available recall information and product labels, keeping in mind that individual retail packages may have received different stickers from the original bulk packaging.
If the product is covered by the recall, FSIS says it should be discarded or returned to the place of purchase.
Restaurants and retailers that have affected products should not sell or serve them.
FSIS said it may update the recalled product list and labels as additional information becomes available. The agency will also conduct recall effectiveness checks to determine whether the affected products have been properly removed from commerce.
Consumers with questions about meat and poultry safety can contact the USDA Meat and Poultry Hotline at 888-MPHotline (888-674-6854) or email [email protected].
Consumers can also report problems involving meat, poultry or processed egg products through the FSIS Electronic Consumer Complaint Monitoring System, including concerns involving illness, injury, allergic reactions and mislabeling.
For now, the central warning remains straightforward: if recalled meat carrying the false establishment number “EST. 1363” is found, consumers should not eat it.
The nationwide distribution of the products, combined with the possibility that some packages may carry retailer-applied labels, is why FSIS is urging consumers, restaurants and retailers to check their supplies carefully.
