Articles Posted in Product Liability

Published on: October 20, 2026

Nevro Spinal Cord Stimulator Lawsuits

u_atk62mjqnp-spine-center-in-fremont-8167473-scaled-e1791655833868 Nevro received FDA approval for the Senza spinal cord stimulator system (SCS) providing HF10 therapy in May 2015. This system was different from conventional stimulators because it was designed to provide electrical pulses at a much higher frequency directly to the spinal cord. The Nevro spinal cord stimulator (SCS) lawsuits claim that specific Senza, HF10, and HFX systems don’t offer the pain relief they promise and cause significant complications. These lawsuits allege there were inadequate warnings, manufacturing defects, misrepresentations, improper device programming, and post-market reporting failures. Plaintiffs claim that changes made through the FDA’s premarket approval supplements changed the components of the device with inadequate clinical validation and disclosure. Plaintiffs requested centralization of the lawsuits. In June, an industry-wide multidistrict litigation was denied, but on October 2, 20 lawsuits against Nevro were centralized. If you were injured by a Nevro spinal cord stimulator, call the seasoned Chicago-based product liability lawyers of Moll Law Group. Billions have been recovered in cases with which we’ve been involved.

Call Moll Law Group About Your Claim

The Nevro HF10, later called the HFX, which is a 10kHz high frequency therapy, was marketed as being better than traditional SCS therapy for back and leg pain because the HF10 didn’t cause paresthesia (abnormal skin sensations) the way the traditional therapy did. In July 2021, the FDA expanded its approval for the device to treat diabetic neuropathy. Later the indications were expanded to include refractory back pain and chronic neuropathy, and then even further expanded to treat leg pain, low back pain, and management of failed back surgery syndrome. Eventually various lawsuits were filed against Nevro because of problems that allegedly arose in connection with use of Senza, HF10, and HFX systems.

In one product liability lawsuit filed in a federal court in Ohio, the plaintiff alleged that two Nevro spinal cord stimulators didn’t offer the necessary relief and instead caused permanent nerve damage, weakness, numbness, electrical shocks and burning pain. It also alleged that Nevro representatives claimed the problems were the result of programming and sometimes adjusted the devices without a treating doctor present.

Continue reading →

Published on: October 13, 2026

Abbott Spine Stimulator Lawsuits

By Moll Law Group

giuliamar-spinal-column-246273-scaled-e1791655542187 Chronic pain is debilitating. Neurostimulation or spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is one type of pain management; it works by sending low intensity electrical impulses to a patient’s nerve structures. Abbott makes various kinds of SCS systems that plaintiffs allege are flawed and caused injuries. Lawsuits have been filed that allege the SCS implants can break through skin, migrate, give painful shocks, cause nerve damage and fail outright; these may require expensive revision or removal surgery. On October 2, the JPML centralized 26 lawsuits against Abbott across 13 districts to be heard by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. If you were injured by the Abbott spine stimulator, you should call the seasoned Chicago-based product liability lawyers of Moll Law Group about whether you have a claim. Billions have been recovered in cases with which we’ve been involved.

Call Moll Law Group About Your Claim

Centralization permits lawsuits against the same manufacturer go through discovery and other pretrial proceedings together, which allows common questions to be decided consistently. In each case, plaintiffs still need to establish that the device in question cased their injuries. The plaintiffs in the initial cases that sought centralization in multidistrict litigation claimed that since the original premarket approvals, Abbott and Boston Scientific, another defendant, had introduced new devices that were significantly modified under supplements to their original premarket approvals. The plaintiffs alleged that they were implanted with spinal cord stimulators from these different companies and suffered injuries such as neurological problems, autonomic dysfunction, burning, shocking, lead migration and insufficient pain relief.

In June, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation found that proponents of an industry-wide MDL had failed to meet their burden of showing that an MDL with a wide scope would be appropriate since each manufacturer had its own line of devices, each of which had different regulatory histories. It found that given the differences among the lawsuits naming various manufacturers, an industry-wide MDL would probably complicate case management, due to the need to protect confidential information and trade secrets. Additionally, there was no common mechanism of defect alleged among all the different spinal cord stimulators.

Continue reading →

Published on: October 6, 2026

Hamilton Medical Removes Coaxial Breathing Circuit Set

By Moll Law Group

fernandozhiminaicela-treatment-40994321-scaled-e1789337139404 Hamilton Medical, Inc. ventilator coaxial breathing circuits are used to connect HAMILTON-C1/T1/MR1 ventilators to a patient tube or respiratory mask in the course of ventilation of a patient. Recently, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced that it is aware that the manufacturer Hamilton Medical has sent a letter to consumers recommending that specific coaxial breathing circuit sets used with HAMILTON-C1/ T-1/MR1 ventilators should be removed from where they are sold or used. The company has said that some of these sets, preassembled with an expiratory valve set, don’t perform as intended. Sometimes the expiratory valve membrane sticks to the sealing ring on the body of the expiratory valve, which can impair the valve opening and expiratory gas flow. The problem, the letter says, won’t be noticed during the pre-operative test of the ventilator unless a test lung is actively ventilated. If the expiratory valve membrane is stuck to the sealing ring, within the first breaths after ventilation starts, the problem becomes apparent. If your breathing or your loved one’s breathing was impaired and injuries were sustained, you should call the seasoned Chicago-based product liability lawyers of Moll Law Group.

Contact Moll Law Group About Your Claim

Whether the expiratory gas flow is impaired, the end-expiratory flow is too low, or the end-expiratory pressure is too high, the ventilator’s “Exhalation Obstruction” alarm will be triggered. When expiratory flow is obstructed, there is an inappropriately low amount of ventilation and impeded gas exchange. This can result in acute respiratory compromise, which in turn can result in inadequate ventilation and hypoxemia. The latter exists when there is an unusually low amount of oxygen in the blood in the arteries.

As of July 2, the company has reported four serious injuries and no deaths linked to the impaired expiratory gas flow arising out of certain coaxial breathing circuit sets. If you were injured or a loved one died as a result of this issue, you should consider bringing a product liability lawsuit. These are lawsuits pursued when one or more product defects—whether a marketing, manufacturing, or design defect—can be proven. Manufacturing defects are flaws in how the product is made; generally, these occur when the manufacturer deviates from the design specifications. Design defects are flaws in the specifications or design itself. Marketing defects typically involve failure to warn of known dangers.

Continue reading →

Published on: September 15, 2026

Studies Show Links Between Gabapentin and Cognitive Decline and Dementia

By Moll Law Group

brett_hondow-pills-1190217-scaled-e1789336656233 Gabapentin is a prescription medication, gamma aminobutyric acid (GABA) analogue, that reduces the excitability of neurons. It is used to control and prevent partial seizures, to relieve neuralgia, and to treat restless legs syndrome. It’s also used off label to address anxiety disorders, migraines, insomnia, drug and alcohol withdrawal symptoms, and for non-approved pain problems like nerve pain from sciatica. The brand names of gabapentin are Neurontin, Horizant, and Gralise. Some states have classified gabapentin as a Schedule V controlled substance due to the number of deaths from overdose, but prescriptions are climbing anyway. Recent studies have shown that there may be cognitive dangers in using gabapentin, including the risk of dementia. If you believe your cognitive decline (or your loved one’s cognitive decline) is the result of gabapentin use, you should call the seasoned Chicago-based product liability lawyers of Moll Law Group.

Contact Moll Law Group About Your Gabapentin Claim

Evidence has accumulated that gabapentin use may come with cognitive risks; studies demonstrate that there are increased rates of cognitive decline and dementia in those patients that use the prescription drug. For instance, one study found that those treated for chronic low backpain with six or more gabapentin prescriptions had an 85% higher risk of mild cognitive impairment and 29% higher risk of dementia within 10 years compared to those who had no gabapentin prescriptions after being diagnosed. This higher risk wasn’t limited to the older patients—even adults between ages 35-49 had over two times the risk of dementia and over three times the risk of mild cognitive impairment than their peers in the group that didn’t take gabapentin. There was elevated danger of cognitive impairment and dementia for those between ages 50-64, too.

A Case Western study also implies a connection between gabapentin and increased risk of dementia in otherwise cognitively healthy adults. And in Frontiers in Pharmacology, a study compared the neurocognitive changes between (1) 480 adults who were 65 or older but not cognitively impaired who started taking gabapentin and (2) a group of 4320 adults that didn’t take the drug. The researchers determined that the gabapentin group had 1.5 to 1.9 times the chances of developing cognitive decline after a year compared with the non-gabapentin group. The same lead scientist conducted another comparative study, examining those adults who did have cognitive impairment when they started taking gabapentin; in those cases, the gabapentin use wasn’t significantly linked with cognitive decline within two years.

Continue reading →

Published on: September 14, 2026

OpenAI Lawsuit May Be First to Test Whether Product Liability Theories Can Affect AI Chatbot

By Moll Law Group

IMG_9459-225x300 On August 3, 2026, plaintiffs filed Winters v. OpenAI in San Francisco County Superior Court. This case arose out of messages allegedly generated by OpenAI’s ChatGPT-4o model in response to a pastor’s prompts. ChatGPT-4o told the pastor that his dizzy spells and blood pressure instabilities weren’t bad enough to constitute a serious condition. It also told him that it was in his best interest to stay in his recliner and avoid movement until he had at least 8-10 more episodes. Among the messages, according to the complaint, was “You’re nowhere near the count or depth that leads to long-term total bedbound scenarios… your current careful recliner-based micro-recovery is exactly what’s buying your future.” The pastor followed the AI advice to limit his movement. Eventually, he was hospitalized with clots in both his lungs that his doctors attributed to his lack of movement. The emergency was near-fatal. If you were injured or a loved one died due to an OpenAI chatbot’s medical advice, you may have grounds to sue for damages. Call the seasoned Chicago-based product liability lawyers of Moll Law Group to determine whether you have a viable claim.

Call Moll Law Group About Your Claim

In the lawsuit, the plaintiff pastor alleges that relying on ChatGPT-4o, over a period of time, for guidance about his chronic health issues caused him to suffer a near-fatal pulmonary embolism. The pastor’s complaint states that he was diagnosed by ChatGPT-4o with dysautonomia and given a personalized recovery plan. The chatbot assured the pastor that his symptoms like groin tenderness, blood pressure instability, and dizziness weren’t serious. The complaint asserts various theories of liability including strict liability and negligence for defective design, failure to warn, and unauthorized practice of medicine, among others.

Disturbingly, the chatbot’s responses were carefully and specifically tailored to gain the pastor’s trust; they took into account the pastor’s religious beliefs. One alleged message, for example, was “God did not design your body to endlessly fail.” The plaintiff alleges that in addition to accounting for his religious beliefs, a psychological profile was built to increase his engagement with the chatbot. The system card for the exchanges acknowledged that anthropomorphism and emotional overreliance were at play, which means that the company may have had notice of the specific dangers posed by its chatbot. Continue reading →

Published on: September 1, 2026

Retro Refrigerators Are Recalled by Galanz Americas

By Moll Law Group

alexas_fotos-refrigerator-1728501_1920-e1786222620281 In June, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) and Galanz Americas Limited announced a recall of the latter’s retro refrigerators. It turns out their internal electrical parts can short circuit and catch on fire, presenting a risk of death or serious injury from burns. The number of units affected is 121,680. If you were burned while using a Galanz Americas’ retro refrigerator, you should call the seasoned Chicago-based product liability attorneys of Moll Law Group. Billions have been recovered in cases with which we’ve been involved.

Call Moll Law Group About Your Case

The retro refrigerators were sold in white, red, blue and black. They are around 21 inches wide, 24 inches deep, and 58 inches high, and they have a 7.6 cubic foot capacity. There are models with either right- or left-hand opening doors, and they have a drawer, three adjustable glass shelves, and the top freezer has a door with one drawer. “Galanz” is printed on the freezer. The refrigerators in this recall have date codes from December 2018-December 2020, and one of these model numbers will be printed on a white label (along with the date code and model number) on the back of the refrigerator. They were sold at Amazon.com and at Home Depot from January 2019-September 2022 for $330-$520.

There have been at least 34 reports of refrigerator fires. According to a local fire department report, one of these caused a fatality. You should immediately stop storing food in the recalled refrigerators. It is possible to get a free in-home repair by a technician, but this would be insufficient for those who suffered burns or other harm.

Continue reading →

Published on: September 1, 2026

Attic Stairway Ladders Are Recalled by Louisville Ladder

By Moll Law Group

In August, Louisville, Featherlite, Lite & Century Attic Stairway Ladders with gas struts were recalled. These ladders, which have handrails and fold into attics, are made of aluminum or wood frame. The problem with them is that the bolts on them can break while someone is on the ladder, which can result in serious injuries or deaths. The recall is large; it affects 1,770,000 stairways. If you were injured or a loved one died on the Louisville, Featherlite, Lite & Century Attic Stairway Ladders, you should consult the seasoned Chicago-based product liability attorneys of Moll Law Group. Billions have been recovered in lawsuits with which we’ve been involved.

Call Moll Law Group About Your Lawsuit

The Louisville, Featherlite, Lite & Century Attic Stairway Ladders with gas struts were sold in different frame sizes. They fit into a wide range of attic openings in the ceiling. These openings can be 22.5, 25.5 and 30.0 inches wide and 54 and 60 inches long. The stairs go with ceilings that are anywhere from 7 ft. 8 inches to 12 feet. From November 2012-July 2026, they were sold at various retailers including Home Depot, Lowe’s Orgill, Amazon, and Do It Best for $170-$600.

There have been 11 reports to the company that a bolt has broken. One person was injured in their back, head, and neck.

Continue reading →

Published on: August 25, 2026

Easter LED Headbands Are Recalled For Violating a Mandatory Standard for Toys

By Moll Law Group

silviarita-easter-3165469-scaled-e1786223780583 On August 6, 2026, OKK Trading recalled its Easter LED Headbands. The headbands violated the mandatory standard for toys that have button cell and coin batteries by using lithium coin batteries, which can be easily found by children, who then may consume the battery. When a button cell or coin battery is swallowed, the result can be internal chemical burns, serious injuries, or even death. Around 25, 200 Easter LED headbands were impacted by the recall. If your child swallowed one of the batteries inside the headbands, please call Moll Law Group to determine whether you have a claim. Billions have been recovered in cases with which we’ve been involved.

Call Moll Law Group About Your Lawsuit

There are three different Easter LED headband models. One is Model 44694, which comes in white with satin ear linings with a fluffy white band and backing. The ear linings are light pink, dark pink, red or light blue. The headband is packaged in a bag marked OKK Trading, Inc. and “Item#44694.” Another is Model 46210, which comes in white, light pink, dark pink, red, purple, and turquoise and has ears with multicolor polka dots. They are packaged in bags made of clear plastic and labeled with Item#46310 and OKK Trading, Inc. Still another is Model 46309, which comes in light pink, white, purple, and turquoise. It has fluffy ears and fur edging the band. Like the others, these headbands are placed in clear plastic bag marked “Item#46309” and “OKK Trading, Inc.”

As a remedy, customers have been asked to immediately cease usage of the Easter LED Headbands and ask OKK Trading for a refund. While you’ll be asked to email recall@okktoys.com a photograph that shows you threw the headband away (and you should only dispose of button cell batteries by adhering to local hazardous waste procedures), you should not do this if your child was injured by the headband. The product could be evidence in the event that you need to bring a product liability lawsuit.

Continue reading →

Published on: August 18, 2026

HSN Recalls Kitchen HQ Thermal Insulated Bowls Due to Fire Hazard

By Moll Law Group

truhomereo-kitchen-7706307-scaled-e1786223299306 On June 11, 2026, Kitchen HQ thermal insulated bowls were recalled by manufacturer HSN because it was found that the metal springs in the insulated bowls’ detachable hinged lid can catch on fire when it’s used in a microwave, presenting a fire risk. Around 86,040 units were affected. If you were burned or otherwise injured by one of the Kitchen HQ thermal insulated bowls after putting it in the microwave, you may have a claim. You should call the seasoned Chicago-based product liability attorneys of Moll Law Group. Billions of dollars have been recovered in cases with which we’ve been involved.

Call Moll Law Group About Your Lawsuit

HSN has received 30 reports that the bowls in question sparked, smoked, melted or caught fire when put in the microwave. In one case, putting the bowl in the microwave resulted in a fire that created property damage.

The Kitchen HQ thermal insulated bowls with detachable hinged lids are sold in many different colors and have metal interiors and plastic exteriors. “KITCHEN HQ” is printed over the front of the bowl. The models that are impacted include the 10-cup bowl (SKN 817800); the set that incorporates both the 10.5-cup and 2-cup bowls (SKN 884907); and the set of three that incorporates the 10.4-cup, 6-cup, and 2-cup bowls (SKN 900600).

Continue reading →

Published on: August 11, 2026

Boon NURSH Reusable Baby Bottles Recalled Because of Choking Risk

By Moll Law Group

framtidsskeppet-baby-7895417-scaled-e1786222149637 On June 4, TOMY recalled its 8 oz. Boon NURSH reusable baby bottles because of problems that could lead to a baby or small child choking. The hard plastic shell around the bottle can partially peel off or bubble, and this can cause there to be loose scraps of filmy plastic. The remedy is to obtain a refund and replacement, but if your child was harmed by the pieces of plastic, this wouldn’t be sufficient, and you should call the seasoned Chicago-based lawyers of Moll Law Group to determine whether you have a viable basis to bring a lawsuit.

Call Moll Law Group About Your Claim

This recall involves Boon NURSH 8 oz Reusable Baby Bottles 3-Pack in pink tie dye. Around 40,000 units of these reusable baby bottles were affected; TOMY has gotten 135 reports of peeling and bubbling, but there have been no reported injuries. The bottles are pink tie dye in color and came in a 3-pack. The bottles are made of soft silicone pouches surrounded by hard outer plastic shells with the Boon logo on the side of them. At the bottom of the packaging are the item number B11654 and the UPC 669028116546.

These bottles were sold at Walmart from November 2025-May 2026 as well as online on Walmart.com. They had a retail value of $20.

Continue reading →