As regulatory scrutiny and litigation risks continue to expand, manufacturers are facing an unprecedented wave of toxic tort and product liability challenges. Substances such as PFAS, silica, benzene, and talc are increasingly at the center of high-stakes lawsuits, with significant implications for the industry.
Join us on November 20, 2025 (noon – 1:00 p.m. CT)
FTC to Sellers: Time to Knock Off the “Made in the USA” Knock-Offs
If you have shopped online lately, odds are you saw products proudly advertising themselves as “Made in the USA.” Maybe it was a flag, a pair of boots, or a kitchen gadget. But how often is that label actually true? According to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), not often enough. And this summer, the FTC delivered a not-so-subtle message to major players in American e-commerce, raising questions about the appropriate roles and responsibilities of platforms versus individual sellers.
Proposed California Legislation on Silicosis Prevention in Manufactured Stone Industry is Withdrawn
In July, a proposed bill named the Silicosis Prevention Act was withdrawn from consideration in California. This proposed bill would have substantially affected the manufactured stone industry by banning dry fabrication activities, imposing licensing requirements for employers and workers, and implementing a public database for violations and other state enforcement actions. Even though this version of the proposed bill was withdrawn, further legislative efforts targeting the manufactured stone industry are anticipated in the future.
MoCRA: What’s on the horizon for PFAS?
This article is one of a series of posts diving into each aspect of The Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act of 2022 (MoCRA) as the industry awaits MoCRA’s full implementation. This installment focuses on MoCRA’s approach to the regulation of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in cosmetic products.
Legal Insights for Manufacturing: Product Liability, Safety and Marketing
I was privileged to serve once again as a contributing editor on our firm’s Legal Insights for Manufacturing report, published yesterday. This was our second-annual report, and it contains some great information and perspectives on the challenges that manufacturers will need to tackle throughout the coming year, including product liability, safety, and marketing, as well
MoCRA: Talc Testing and Sample Preparation Requirements
As discussed in the Product Perspective, the Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act of 2022 (MoCRA) represents a major shift in cosmetic industry regulations. This article, in a continuing series of posts diving into each aspect of MoCRA, covers the talc testing and sample preparation requirements which will be established by the FDA under MoCRA.
MoCRA: FDA Draft Guidance on Facility Registration and Product Listing
As we previously discussed, MoCRA requires cosmetic product manufacturer and processors to register their facilities with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). On August 7, 2023, FDA announced that it had published a draft guidance on cosmetic product facility registration and product listings, as required under the Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act of 2022 (MoCRA). The draft guidance intends to help the industry by providing relevant requirements and definitions, explaining who is responsible for making submissions, what details to include, and how and when to make the submissions. It also provides information on exemptions, such as those for certain small businesses.
MoCRA: Updates to FDA Safety Substantiation Requirements
As discussed in the Product Perspective, the Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act of 2022 (MoCRA) represents a major shift in cosmetic industry regulations. This article, in our continuing series of posts diving into each aspect of MoCRA, covers the process for substantiating safety of cosmetic products.
Car Break-Ins Expose Shocking Vehicle Vulnerabilities and Spark Multidistrict Litigation: A $200M Settlement Reached by Kia and Hyundai
A Multidistrict Litigation started by a TikTok trend of individuals breaking into cars recently settled for an estimated $200 million. The Plaintiffs alleged that the Defendants—Hyundai and Kia—knowingly sold defective vehicles that were vulnerable to theft while also asserting that Defendants prioritized profits over safety. The vehicles at issue included 2011-2022 Kia vehicles and 2015-2022 Hyundai vehicles that were equipped with traditional “insert-and-turn” steel key ignition systems. Plaintiffs argued that vehicles lacking immobilizer technology were particularly susceptible to theft. According to Plaintiffs, without an immobilizer, anyone with a USB cable could steal the vehicle. Plaintiffs’ lawsuit encompassed various claims, including consumer fraud, unjust enrichment, and deceptive trade practices.
MoCRA: Good Manufacturing Practices – Why Should You Care?