CPSC Reform Legislation Before President for Signing into Law
Client Alert | 1 min read | 08.08.08
On Wednesday, July 30, H.R. 4040, the conference report to the "Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008" passed in the House of Representatives by a vote of 424 - 1. Late Thursday, July 31, the conference report passed in the Senate by a vote of 89 - 3. The President is expected to sign the bill into law in the next several weeks. Among other reform measures, the Act calls for broad changes in children's products safety and CPSC enforcement authority. Some notable provisions include:
- Defining children's products as those intended for use by children 12 years old and younger
- Enacting a progressive ban on lead in children's products
- Permanently banning three types of phthalates (DEHP, DBP, BBP) concentrations above 0.1 percent while temporarily banning three others (DINP, DIDP, DnOP) in children's products
- Additional requirements on certain children's products and toys including tracking labels, third party testing and advertising and labeling rules
- Requiring manufacturers of durable infant and toddler products to provide consumers with a postage-paid consumer registration form with each such product
- Establishing a publicly available, searchable, accessible database of consumer reports of harm
- Broadening CPSC authority to recall products and modify corrective action plans
- Enhancing CPSC authority to identify complete supply chains
- Significantly increasing civil penalties to $100,000 per violation or up to $15 million for a related series of violations as well as increasing criminal penalties from a maximum of one year to a maximum of five years
Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 12.04.25
District Court Grants Preliminary Injunction Against Seller of Gray Market Snack Food Products
On November 12, 2025, Judge King in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington granted in part Haldiram India Ltd.’s (“Plaintiff” or “Haldiram”) motion for a preliminary injunction against Punjab Trading, Inc. (“Defendant” or “Punjab Trading”), a seller alleged to be importing and distributing gray market snack food products not authorized for sale in the United States. The court found that Haldiram was likely to succeed on the merits of its trademark infringement claim because the products at issue, which were intended for sale in India, were materially different from the versions intended for sale in the U.S., and for this reason were not genuine products when sold in the U.S. Although the court narrowed certain overbroad provisions in the requested order, it ultimately enjoined Punjab Trading from importing, selling, or assisting others in selling the non-genuine Haldiram products in the U.S. market.
Client Alert | 21 min read | 12.04.25
Highlights: CMS’s Proposed Rule for Medicare Part C & D (CY 2027 NPRM)
Client Alert | 11 min read | 12.01.25
