Product Liability

Published on: May 12, 2022

Biden Administration Makes a Request of the Supreme Court in Roundup Weedkiller Case

man-gba9125107_640 On May 10, 2022, President Joe Biden’s administration responded to the Supreme Court’s request that it provide its views on Roundup weedkiller litigation. Plaintiffs pursued claims against the manufacturer of Roundup weedkiller, Bayer, because evidence surfaced that Roundup may have caused their cancer. In the course of the litigation, Bayer had tried to evade liability by asking the Supreme Court to dismiss customer claims. When asked to weigh in, Biden’s solicitor general filed a brief asking the Court to reject Bayer’s request. In most cases, the Court defers to the solicitor general’s conclusions, so this is a crucial moment in the litigation. If you were diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and exposed to Roundup, you should call the experienced product liability lawyers of Moll Law Group, which represents plaintiffs around the country. Billions have been recovered in cases with which we’ve been involved.

Talk to the Product Liability Lawyers of Moll Law Group About Your Claim

The brief from the Biden administration may have an impact on whether Bayer is willing to settle claims in the Roundup litigation. Court-watchers are closely scrutinizing whether the Supreme Court takes up Bayer’s request for review of a Northern California case because there are thousands of Roundup cases and many people who may be affected by the Court’s decision.

The Northern California case about which Bayer seeks review was brought by a Roundup user, Edwin Hardeman. He alleged that his cancer had been caused by Roundup and received $25 million in damages in a lower court decision. He had regularly used the weedkiller at his northern California home before getting diagnosed with a type of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. The Ninth Circuit had upheld this damages award in May. It was just one of many lawsuits alleging that the manufacturer should have warned consumers about the alleged cancer risk.

Continue reading →

Published on: April 29, 2022

Infant Formula Litigation Transferred to Multidistrict Litigation

By Moll Law Group

drinking-milk-gd45eea696_640 It is important to be aware that specific powdered infant formulas such as Similac and Enfamil have been linked to causing necrotizing enterocolitis in premature babies. Manufacturer Abbott Laboratories, Inc. made a motion before the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation to centralize the infant formula lawsuits pending against them in the District of Connecticut. In the cases to be transferred, the harmed plaintiffs contended that their infant formula, based on milk, causes necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) when given to premature babies. If you believe your premature baby suffered from necrotizing enterocolitis and was injured or died because of infant formula, you may have a claim that can be heard as part of multidistrict litigation (MDL). Give the seasoned product liability lawyers of Moll Law Group a call. Billions have been recovered in cases with which we’ve been involved.

Discuss Your Infant Formula Case with Moll Law Group

The motion to transfer the lawsuits involving powdered infant formula to a district court in Illinois was supported by Mead Johnson Nutrition Company and Mead Johnson & Company, LLC. The plaintiffs agreed that it would be appropriate to centralize the 16 cases pending in 7 districts, along with 20 possibly-related lawsuits in 8 districts.

Continue reading →

Published on: April 28, 2022

Recall of Defective Magnetic Balls

By Moll Law Group

magnetic-ball-g5fa74c0ee_640 Parents should be aware of a troubling risk that magnetic spheres carry. HD Premier’s DigitDots Magnetic Balls have been recalled because children have swallowed them and suffer perforations and blockages of intestines, blood poisoning, and infection; these are problems that can lead to death. Around 119,620 units of these magnetic balls have been sold online at www.ilovedigitdots.com, www.amazon.com and other websites from March 2019 -January 2022 for $20 – $30. If your child swallowed a Digit Dot Magnetic Ball or other magnet and suffered injuries, you should call the seasoned product liability lawyers of Moll Law Group. Billions have been recovered in cases with which we’ve been involved.

Give the Moll Law Group a Call About Injuries from Magnets

All 3 mm and 5 mm DigitDots Magnetic Balls have been recalled for safety. They are small and spherical rare earth magnets that have strong magnetic flux. While the 3 mm diameter magnets are sold as aggregated loose magnets, the 5 mm diameter magnets are sold as loose magnets in sets of 222 silver magnetic balls or 224 multicolored magnetic balls. The ones that were recalled were sold in clear, disposable packaging that bears the DigitDots name and logo and includes a plastic carrying case that is also imprinted with the DigitDots name and logo. It’s been found that when two or more of these magnets are swallowed, they may attract to each other or a different swallowed metal object. Often these magnetic balls are inadvertently swallowed by children; in some cases, they are intentionally swallowed by a small child who doesn’t understand the possible consequences. Once ingested, the magnets can become stuck in the digestive system and cause injuries or death as a result of the magnets blocking, twisting, or even perforating the intestines.

So far, HD Premier has been made aware of four children who swallowed the DigitDots and needed to undergo surgery to remove the magnets. However, DigitDots are not the only brand of magnets that carry this risk of ingestion. The Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has become aware of reports of other companies’ high powered magnets being ingested and needing surgery. Two children or teenagers died. Consumers have been asked to stop using recalled magnets and to remove them from access by children. You can contact HD Premier to return the recalled magnets with a prepaid label. Once the company receives the returned magnet, you should receive a refund.

Continue reading →

Published on: April 22, 2022

Sakar International Helmets Were Recalled

By Moll Law Group

Recently Sakar International Helmets’ Dimensions Bluetooth Speaker multi-purpose helmets were recalled because they did not comply with federal safety standards. For that reason, head injuries may result if the wearer of the helmet falls. After suffering injuries because your helmet was defective, you may be uncertain about what recourse you have. If you suffered head or other injuries due to a recalled bicycle helmet, you should call the experienced Chicago product liability lawyers of Moll Law Group. Billions have been recovered in litigation with which we’ve been involved.

Hire the Moll Law Group If You Were Injured Because of a Defective Helmet

Sakar’s recall concerned the Dimensions Bluetooth Speaker helmets, which are black helmets with black straps and buckles. A white label inside the helmet is printed with Item # ACTGEAR-238BTS in the bottom left corner. These helmets were sold only at Walmart from July 2020 – January 2022 for roughly $25. 89,000 of them were sold. When these helmets don’t comply with federal safety standards, a fall can result in serious injuries. Consumers are supposed to immediately cease use of the recalled helmets and get in touch with Sakar to receive instructions to get a free replacement helmet. Sakar intends to facilitate the return by providing prepaid postage packaging.

If you were already injured as the result of a fall involving a defective helmet made by Sakar, however, you may be concerned about recourse for the losses flowing from those injuries. You may be able to recover damages by filing a product liability lawsuit against the manufacturer and others in the chain of commerce. To recover damages, our lawyers will need to establish that the helmet was defective in terms of its design, marketing, or manufacturing. Defects in design are flaws in what the product is supposed to be. For example, if none of the helmets comply with safety standards, there is likely a design flaw. However, if only certain helmets have problems, it is more likely a manufacturing defect, or flaw in how the helmet was made. Experts may need to testify on the type of defect.

Continue reading →

Published on: April 14, 2022

Recall of Sure and Brut Aerosol Sprays

By Moll Law Group

deodorant-g44ebc4c3b_640 In February 2022, manufacturer HRB Brands voluntarily recalled its Sure and Brut Aerosol sprays, which are used as antiperspirants or deodorants to stop or mask body odor. This recall was instituted because benzene, which is carcinogenic, was present in the product. Most of these sprays were distributed in the United States with one spray, Brut Aerosol Deodorant, distributed in Canada. Consumers have been advised to stop using recalled sprays when the expiration date is on or before August 2023. If you were harmed by the recalled Sure or Brut Aerosol sprays or another aerosol spray that contained benzene, you should give the seasoned Chicago product liability lawyers of Moll Law Group a call. Billions have been recovered in cases with which we were involved.

Call Moll Law Group If You Were Harmed by an Aerosol Spray

The voluntary recall of Sure and Brut Aerosol sprays affects all lot numbers that expired on or before August 2023 Benzene isn’t listed as an ingredient in these products; the unanticipated benzene levels come from the propellant spraying the substance from the can. Benzene is a human carcinogen that can occur through inhalation, oral consumption, or through the skin. Benzene is prevalent in the environment and people around the world are exposed to it daily both indoors and outdoors, but sometimes exposures result in cancers like leukemia and blood cancer of the bone marrow, along with life-threatening blood disorders. Helen of Troy Limited owned and distributed the product before June 7, 2021.

Distributors and retailers have been told to stop distribution of the affected aerosol sprays. If you have questions about the recall, you can contact TCP HOT Acquisition LLC, dba HRB Brands by calling 1-866-615-0976 Monday to Friday from 8:30am–5pm (PT). You can request a product refund as a remedy. However, if you suspect you were injured or made sick by the product, you should call a doctor or healthcare provider and notify the FDA’s MedWatch Adverse Event Reporting program about your adverse reactions or quality problems.

Continue reading →

Published on: April 8, 2022

Recall of Airborne Gummies

By Moll Law Group

Reckitt voluntarily recalled certain bottles of 63-count and 75-count Airborne Gummies because it was found that when the bottle is opened for the first time, pressure built up within the bottle presents the possibility of injury. Bottles of gummies that have already been opened do not present this danger to consumers and others. Around 3.7 million units of this product have already been sold. If you were harmed by a bottle of Airborne gummies, you should give the experienced Chicago-based product liability attorneys of Moll Law Group a call. Billions have been recovered in cases with which we’ve been involved.

Discuss a Claim with the Moll Law Group

Certain Airborne Gummies were recalled in cooperation with the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). When pressure builds up in the recalled bottles, the cap and seal may fly off forcefully. However, not all Airborne Gummies were recalled. Rather, the recall affected only bottles with certain flavors distributed in the United States between May 2020 – February 2022. The affected flavors were assorted fruit, orange, and blueberry pomegranate. Elderberry and Honey Lemon are not affected by the recall. Consumers have been advised not to open the product; you should use a lot code search tool to figure out whether your bottle is included in the recall. As a consumer, you can contact Reckitt to return an unopened, affected bottle and get a full refund. The item can be returned using postage-paid labeling. However, bottles that have already been opened aren’t subject to the recall because the pressure has already been released from them. Additionally, you should be aware that the gummies inside aren’t affected by the build-up of pressure and may still be consumed.

However, what if you were injured by a bottle that you opened when the cap came flying off? You may be able to recover compensation through a lawsuit against the manufacturer of the bottle. In a product liability lawsuit, it is alleged that a particular product is defective with regard to its marketing, design, or manufacturing. Marketing defects tend to involve failure to warn.

Continue reading →

Published on: March 30, 2022

Fitbit Recalls Its Smart Watches Due to Burn Risks

By Moll Law Group

woman-g233a70add_640-300x200 The Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has announced Fitbit’s March 2, 2022 recall of its Iconic smart watches due to the risk of burn injuries. The company found that the lithium-ion battery in its smartwatch may overheat. Around 1 million affected Fitbits have been sold around the country. The remedy if you have this smartwatch, is a refund. However, if you were burned by a Fitbit or any other smart watch, you should consult the seasoned Chicago-based product liability lawyers of Moll Law Group about whether you have grounds to sue for damages. Billions have been recovered in cases with which we’ve been involved.

Call the Product Liability Lawyers of the Moll Law Group About a Defective Smartwatch

The smartwatches involved in the recall are the Fitbit Iconic Smartwatches, which are sold with a polyurethane band and that have a 1.4 inch color LCD screen. Watches are sold in different colors including combinations that feature smoke gray, burnt around, ink blue, silver gray, and slate blue. One of them is cobranded with Adidas. The smartwatch tracks sleep, heart rate, and activity. The recalled Iconic smart watch has a model number, FB503, printed on the back of the device close to where the band connects to the watch.

The company has received at least 115 reports in America, as well as 59 reports from around the world that the battery overheats. Seventy-eight people have reported burn injuries in America; these included 2 reports of third-degree burns and 4 reports of second-degree burns. There have been 40 reports of burn injuries across the globe.

Continue reading →

Published on: March 16, 2022

CPSC Complaint Against Leachco for the Podsters

By Moll Law Group

newborn-gc398873d0_640-300x200 Leachco, Inc. manufacturers infant loungers called the “Podsters.” After reports of two infant deaths in connection with these loungers, the company refused to undertake a voluntary recall. The United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) filed an administrative complaint about the loungers against Leachco. The complaints concern Leachco’s Podster, Podster Plush, Bummzie and Podster Playtime. If your baby was suffocated in one of the Podsters, or another infant lounger, you should consult the seasoned Chicago-based product liability lawyers of Moll Law Group about whether you have recourse. We represent clients around the country. Billions have been recovered in lawsuits with which we’ve been involved.

Give the Product Liability Lawyers of the Moll Law Group A Call

Podsters measure 71-75 inches in circumference and are about 23.75 by 21.5 by 8 inches. They’re designed with a removable cover with a core of elastic nylon-spandex and padded insert and come in a variety of prints. Around 180,000 Podsters have been sold. However, the CPSC found in January that public safety required a warning of the suffocation hazard the Podster presents. In an administrative complaint filed against Leachco, the CPSC Chair noted that the Commission wouldn’t ignore products that put vulnerable infants at unnecessary risk and that the CPSC was filing the complaint as a last resort because the manufacturer had failed to respond to safety concerns previously raised.

The complaint explains that the infant loungers may obstruct airflow if an infant moves, rolls, or is put in a position in which his nose or mouth are obstructed by the Podsters. The loungers include warnings and instructions about using the product but the complaint reasons that caregivers will foreseeably use the infant lounger for sleep, leaving the infant without supervision. By law, the actual use of a product is part of the evaluation of whether a product is defective.

Continue reading →

Published on: March 10, 2022

Hot Air Brushes Recalled Due to Danger of Electrocution or Shock

By Moll Law Group

hairdresser-gf51ec0d83_640-e1646839051297 BrushX hot air brushes were recalled on February 17, 2022 due to the risks of electrocution or shock. If you were left with injuries due to electrocution or shock from a BrushX hot air brush, you should consult the experienced Chicago-based product liability lawyers of the Moll Law Group about whether you have grounds to sue for damages. Billions have been recovered in cases with which we’ve been involved. When you’ve been harmed by a large company, it’s wise to pursue product liability lawsuits with a lawyer who understands how to mount a strong case for clients.

Give the Product Liability Lawyers of the Moll Law Group A Call

The BrushX hot air brushes were recalled because they weren’t designed with an immersion protection device. That means if you use the brush and it falls into water over your sink or bathtub while it’s plugged in, you could be electrocuted or shocked. Around 100,000 hot air brushes were affected by the recall: the BrushX One (the Styler, Dryer & Volumizer), as well as the BrushX Gen.2 hot air brushes.

The brushes in question have been sold in both black and combinations of black and pink. A “not waterproof” symbol marks the back of the brush.

Continue reading →

Published on: March 3, 2022

Second Infant Died After Consuming Recalled Abbot Baby Formula

By Moll Law Group

baby-g909db3e6f_640-e1646267137939 Recently, Abbot Nutrition expanded its recall of baby formula after a second baby died from infection after consuming the formula Abbot Nutrition’s Similac PM 60/40 with a lot code 27032K800. Four reports of Cronobacter sakazakii infection have been reported in connection with products from the plant. If your baby was harmed, hospitalized, or died because of its consumption of Abbot Nutrition’s Similac, you should call the experienced Chicago-based product liability lawyers of the Moll Law Group about whether you have a claim against the manufacturer. Similac PM is specifically intended for infants that are helped by lowered mineral intake; the specific formula in question wasn’t included in a prior, February 17 recall for lots of Similac, Alimentum, and EleCare, powdered formulas, that were also produced at the same plant. No parent should have to go through the anguish of a baby who dies because of a formula that should have been safe.

Call the Seasoned Product Liability Lawyers of Moll Law Group About Your Lawsuit

The FDA has updated its website to investigate another illness due to another Cronobacter sakazakii, which is a rare and dangerous bacteria that causes serious medical complications, including blood infections. A child died after hospitalization and an infection with this germ may have contributed to his death. He had consumed Similac before becoming infected. While four infections involving Cronobacter sakazakii were reported to the FDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, a Salmonella Newport infection was also reported alongside the outbreak. The five infants who became sick were all hospitalized. Two died.

Following the second baby’s death, Abbott Nutrition recalled the powdered formula the baby had consumed. To determine whether you are using a lot of powdered formula that has been recalled, you can look at the 7-9 digit code and expiration at the bottom of the package. Take a look at whether the first two digits of the code are 22 -67, the code contains Z2, SH, or K8, and the expiration date is April 1^st or later. You can type in the code on the bottom of your package at Similacrecall.com to make sure it’s part of the recall.

Continue reading →