Topic Archives: Product Liability

Judge Koh Issues First Blow to “Added Sugars” Plaintiffs

The Big Picture:  On Tuesday, Judge Koh granted Kellogg’s Motion to Dismiss in its entirety in Hadley v. Kellogg Sales Company, No. 5:16-cv-04955-LHK (N.D. Cal.).  Hadley is one of three cases[1] against well-known cereal makers pending in the Northern District of California.  All three actions challenge various factually true “health” representations on the cereal packaging ...›

Magnets

CPSC to Consider New Magnet Set Safety Standards Following 10th Circuit Decision in Zen Magnets

We have entered the next chapter in the ongoing saga of the Consumer Product Safety Commission’s (“CPSC”) regulation of high-powered, small, rare earth magnet sets (“SREMS”).[1]  On March 1, 2017, CPSC met and unanimously approved removing the Magnet Sets Safety Standard from the Code of Federal Regulations.[2]  On separate motion, the Commissioners split 3-2 along ...›

House Passes Bill Proposing Sweeping Changes to Class Action Litigation

The House of Representatives has passed legislation that will fundamentally change class actions as we know them.  The Fairness in Class Action Litigation Act of 2017 (the “Act” or “H.R. 985”) leaves no stage of class action litigation untouched.  For example, the provisions require stricter “typicality” requirements for class members, the disclosure of conflicts of ...›

A Changing of the Guard: Same Enforcement Trend under New CPSC Leadership?

Republican Ann Marie Buerkle was named Acting Chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) on February 9, 2017, replacing former Chairman and Democrat Elliott Kaye. This transition has many wondering whether the trend of increased CPSC enforcement, and its pledge to issue increased civil penalties, will continue under Buerkle’s leadership. ...›

Medical
February 17, 2017Product Liability

Expanding Duties and Eroding Protections for Medical Device Manufacturers

Earlier this month, the Washington Supreme Court saddled medical device manufacturers with a new duty to warn under Washington law—the duty to warn hospitals about potential risks their products may pose—and eroded exemptions from strict liability afforded to manufacturers of certain “unavoidably unsafe” products. This decision comes as a surprise and represents an unexpected shift in the law with regard to medical device manufacturers. ...›

Gavel
February 6, 2017Product Liability

Plaintiffs’ Fraudulent Joinder Tactic Results in Dismissal

Defendants successfully argued “fraudulent joinder” in Bahalim v. Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Inc., winning dismissal of the case in its entirety. The case was decided on Plaintiffs’ motion to remand and Defendants’ motions to dismiss after Defendant Ferring Pharmaceuticals removed the suit to federal court based on diversity jurisdiction. ...›

Sling
January 26, 2017Consumer Products, CPSC, Product Liability

New CPSC Safety Standard on Baby Slings

In early January, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) adopted a new federal safety standard for infant sling carriers. 82 Fed. Reg. 2326-1 (Jan. 9, 2017). CPSC’s new rule follows its 2010 warning that baby slings can pose a suffocation hazard to infants. Under the new standard, all baby slings must now bear a permanently attached warning label and clear instructions for use. ...›

Magnets

Small Magnets, Big Trouble – Zen Successfully Challenges CPSC Rulemaking in the 10th Circuit

The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit recently vacated the Consumer Product Safety Commission’s (CPSC) 2014 rulemaking that prohibits the importation and distribution of high-powered, small, rare earth magnet sets (SREMS).  See Zen Magnets, LLC v. Consumer Product Safety Comm’n., No. 14-9610 (10th Cir, Nov. 22, 2016).  As we have previously reported, ...›

January 23, 2017Product Liability

What Part Did You Not Understand? Recent State-Court Decisions Require The U.S. Supreme Court To Address—Yet Again—The Constitutional Limits On Personal Jurisdiction

In its most recent decisions on personal jurisdiction, the Supreme Court has reiterated the distinction between general personal jurisdiction on the one hand and specific personal jurisdiction on the other. As to the former, courts may exercise general or “all-purpose” personal jurisdiction over a defendant “to hear any and all claims against it” only when ...›

Rare Court Decision in CPSC-Backed Enforcement Action

A federal district court in Wisconsin recently ruled against a product manufacturer, finding it liable for failing to report timely in a rare U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) backed lawsuit. United States v. Spectrum Brands, Inc., No. 15-CV-371-WMC, 2016 WL 6835371, at *24 (W.D. Wis. Nov. 17, 2016). While CPSC actively oversees voluntary recalls, it seldom brings suit in court. ...›