In a Law360 article published today, “How Food, Beverage Claims May Preview Cosmetic Litigation,” Crowell attorneys argue that class action litigation trends from the food and beverage industry — including lawsuits over “natural” labeling claims, deceptive packaging (slack-fill), and greenwashing — are directly foreshadowing, and providing a strategic roadmap for, the wave of similar litigation
A new bill introduced in the California legislature proposes to overhaul the state’s product recall liability framework—and depending on where you sit in the supply chain, the consequences could be far-reaching. Assembly Bill 2462 would amend the state’s Product Recall Safety and Protection Act to redefine who qualifies as a “manufacturer,” broaden the scope of cost-free recall obligations, and dramatically increase penalties for violations. Introduced by Assembly Member Pellerin on February 20, 2026, the bill’s provisions would apply across the consumer product supply chain, touching manufacturers, importers, distributors, wholesalers, retailers, and, most notably, brand licensors.
Continue Reading The Hidden Recall Risk in Your Licensing Agreement: What California’s Assembly Bill 2462 Could Mean for Your Business
Day 4 marked the close of the ICPHSO 2026 Annual Meeting & Training Symposium in Orlando, Florida following a jam-packed week of education, exploration, and meaningful dialogue about the future of product safety and regulatory compliance in the U.S. and beyond. The day began with the traditional passing of the gavel to welcome incoming ICPHSO president Dani Cugini while acknowledging and celebrating the accomplishments of outgoing President Chris Harvey.
Then, in a first ever for ICPHSO, participants were thrust into the Courtroom for a mock-trial experience, giving many product safety professionals their first inside look at the complexities and challenges of litigating safety and products liability issues. Crowell’s “court reporter,” Sean Ward, was on the scene with a riveting recap of all the action. As court was called to recess, Day 4’s short program concluded with a series of plenary sessions highlighting the consumer perspective and the need for inclusive and proactive safety solutions that recognize the dynamic challenges faced by vulnerable populations and ensure accessibility to safety information for all.
Below is a closer look at select sessions from the final day of ICPHSO 2026.
Continue Reading Day 4 of the ICPHSO Symposium: Courtroom Drama & Consumer Voices
Tuesday, February 24 was the second day of the ICPHSO Annual Meeting and Training Symposium in Orlando, Florida. The Crowell team was on the ground throughout the day, and the sessions did not disappoint. From cybersecurity standards for IoT devices and the European Union’s (EU) sweeping new compliance obligations — the General Product Safety Regulation (GPSR), the Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation (ESPR), and Digital Product Passports — to U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) eFiling deadlines and the challenge of age-grading products in a social media landscape, the recurring question was the same: how do regulators, companies, and standards bodies stay ahead of a marketplace that never stops moving?
With that backdrop in mind, here are some highlights from the day’s sessions and key takeaways for product safety professionals today.
Continue Reading Day Two of the ICPHSO Symposium: The Race to Keep Pace — Regulation in a Fast-Moving World
When a product is recalled, class action lawsuits are not the only threat. Recalled products can also give rise to droves of individual actions. This is the case for Exactech, Inc., a manufacturer of implants, instruments, and technologies for joint replacement.
Following an initial pause in elective procedures at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of hip arthroplasty surgeries has grown at a steady pace. These procedures commonly use acetabular liners to increase the stability of the total hip arthroplasty. Now, Exactech, a manufacturer of acetabular liners, is under fire nine months after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) announced a Class II recall of the Exactech Connexion GXL acetabular polyethylene liner in June 2021. A Class II recall involves situations in which consumers may experience temporary or medically reversible health consequences or the likelihood of serious adverse health consequences is remote.
Continue Reading Recall Litigation Report: Exactech Joint Replacement Products
Supply chain issues are a top concern for many companies across industries and markets. Please join Crowell & Moring for a webinar series that explores these issues and provides insights on the various legal and tactical considerations as companies think about supply chain disruption, impacts, and solutions.
In one of the most significant developments in product safety law over the past decade, Gree Electric Appliances Inc. of Zhuhai, Hong Kong Gree Electric Appliances Sales Co. Ltd., and Gree USA Inc. (the “Gree Companies”), an appliance manufacturer and two of its subsidiaries, have pled guilty to willfully failing to report to the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) under Section 15(b) of the Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA). According to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and the CPSC, the Gree Companies knew their dehumidifiers were defective, failed to meet applicable safety standards, and could catch fire, but failed to timely report that information to the CPSC. Section 19 of the CPSA makes it unlawful to fail to furnish information required by Section 15(b), and such failures are subject to both civil and criminal penalties. While CPSC civil penalties have become fairly routine—the Gree Companies also paid a then-record $15.45 million civil penalty in 2016—this is the first corporate criminal enforcement action brought under the CPSA, according to the DOJ.
Continue Reading Silence Isn’t Golden: Failure to Report Consumer Product Safety Issues Results in Rare $91 Million Criminal Penalty
Product liability suits and regulatory product defect enforcement actions associated with consumer foreseeable – and unforeseeable – misuse have become the norm. Consumer product companies can mitigate these risks by focusing on use-related hazards and user-centered designs in an effort to reduce injuries and improve the usability of products. But the real question is how far to go with these efforts — at what cost and for what incremental benefit.
On March 15, 2018, the Consumer Product Safety Commission published Draft Guidance on the Application of Human Factors to Consumer Products for industry comment by May 14, 2018. The draft guidance was developed in conjunction with Health Canada’s Consumer Product Safety Directorate. CPSC and Health Canada aim to increase product safety by explaining to product designers and manufacturers how to incorporate human factors[1] into the design process.
The draft guidance describes the product design process and provides guidance on human factors considerations at each stage and then summarized in the graphic depictions collected at the end of this post. Because the guidance is not an enforceable rule, no cost benefit analysis accompanies the myriad of product design recommendations proposed.