Consumer Product Safety

Recently, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) informed what could turn out to be a very large number of consumer product companies that it discovered what appears to be a mass inadvertent disclosure of nonpublic manufacturer and product specific information.

Commissioner Elliot Kaye recently released a framework, which he co-authored with his Senior Science and Policy Advisor, Dr. Jonathan Midgett, that provides an “overview of technology-neutral best practices to ensure consumer product safety in the design and deployment of devices, software and systems used with the Internet-connected consumer products.” This framework should prove useful to consumer product companies as they navigate the burgeoning world of IoT devices.

Now in its fifth week, the partial government shutdown has left many companies wondering what to do about recalls for consumer products. Generally, consumer product companies work in coordination with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (“CPSC”) when conducting recalls. But like other affected agencies, the CPSC is currently operating with only its essential staff members, which is about 20 or fewer employees.

On Friday, October 5, 2018, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (“CPSC”) announced that Costco Wholesale, Corp. (Costco) entered into a settlement agreement with the CPSC to pay a $3.85 million civil penalty for its alleged failure to report defective trash cans. The penalty agreement was accepted 4-0 by the Commission. Notably, this is the first multi-million dollar civil penalty in the post-CPSIA era where there was not a Democratic majority at the CPSC, indicating that penalty actions are far from moribund under the current leadership.

As has been widely reported, in May 2018, a Los Angeles Superior Court judge ruled that Prop 65 warning labels are required to be placed on “ready-to-drink” coffee products. Acrylamide, a Prop 65 listed chemical that allegedly is a carcinogen, forms during the coffee roasting process. 

One week after a San Francisco jury decided against Monsanto and awarded a plaintiff $289 million due to the alleged exposure that caused his cancer, the California Supreme Court refused to hear any further challenges by Monsanto.

On July 1, 2018, California’s revised Automatic Renewal Law (ARL), Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17600 et seq., goes into effect.

Recently, a federal judge sitting in the Eastern District of California (Sacramento), for the first time, refused to require a manufacturer to place a Prop 65 warning on its product based on a finding that the requirement would violate the company’s First Amendment rights. We have been following this developing issue for some time.

The consumer product safety community is rarely provided guidance by federal court decisions. On Tuesday, however, Judge R. Brooke Jackson of the Federal District Court for the District of Colorado issued an opinion in the never-ending saga of Zen Magnets, LLC v. CPSC.

Fresh off a victory in the CA primary, California Attorney General Xavier Bacerra filed suit on June 7, 2018 against Nutraceutical Corporation of Park City, Utah and Graceleigh, Inc. dba Sammy’s Milk of Newport Beach, CA, alleging violations of California’s Proposition 65 and California’s consumer protection laws.

As this space has addressed before (see here and here), the California Transparency in Supply Chain Act (Civ. Code section 1714.43), enacted in 2010, requires large retailers and manufacturers (those with worldwide sales in excess of $100 million) doing business in California to disclose on their websites.

Yesterday, President Donald Trump nominated Peter Feldman to fill the fifth and final spot as Commissioner of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission.

As this space has discussed on several occasions, there are many issues with California's Prop 65.

Yesterday the U.S. Senate confirmed Dana Baiocco (pronounced “Bee Awe Co”) as a Commissioner for the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission with a term that runs through October of 2024.

A recent Federal Court decision on the issue of whether to grant a preliminary injunction in the ongoing saga of the appropriateness of adding the pesticide Glyphosate to the CA Prop 65 list has become the grist for the "Fake News" phenomenon.

On Friday, February 16, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (“CPSC”) announced that it had voted 3-1 (along party lines) to authorize CPSC staff to file an administrative complaint against Britax Child Safety, Inc., (“Britax”) a global manufacturer of car seats, strollers, and other juvenile products.

Much of the recent discussion regarding Prop 65 has been focused on the regulatory changes going into effect in August of 2018. And that makes sense since there will be significant changes to the warnings, responsibility, and labeling obligations on product websites.

With Congress back in session, on January 8th President Trump was swift to re-nominate Acting Chairman Ann Marie Buerkle to be the permanent Chairman of the CPSC, along with a nomination for a second term as a Commissioner.  President Trump also re-nominated Dana Baiocco to be a Commissioner.

Another Federal agency with a consumer-protection mandate has taken a significant step to reset compliance expectations and enforcement priorities for over-the-counter homeopathic drug products.