CPSC Streamlined Rule on Certification
Client Alert | 1 min read | 11.12.08
On November 11, 2008, the Consumer Product Safety Commission ("CPSC") issued an immediately-effective final rule (16 CFR pt. 1110) streamlining certification requirements under the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 ("CPSIA") for foreign manufacturers and private labelers. [Click the link above to download a PDF of the final rule]
For imported products, the final rule designates the importer as "the sole entity that must issue the certificate required." The certificate must be available upon request when the product or shipment is available for inspection in the United States.
For domestically produced products, the final rule designates the domestic manufacturer as the sole entity required to issue the certificate. The certificate must be available upon request before the product or shipment is introduced into domestic commerce.
The final rule establishes that the required certificates may be available in electronic form for purposes of "accompanying" a shipment and being "furnished" to distributors and retailers. An acceptable electronic form is a unique identifier for the electronic version of the certificate accessible by a World Wide Web URL or other electronic means.
The CPSC cited the "extremely short deadline" for compliance with the certification requirement, the "vast expansion" of products covered by the requirement, and the confusion over the requirement as its justifications for streamlining the rule, "at least in its initial phase." The certification requirements established by the CPSIA go into effect for products manufactured on or after November 12, 2008.
Insights
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.26.25
From ‘Second’ to ‘First:’ Federal Circuit Tackles Obvious Claim Errors
Patent claims must be clear and definite, as they set the boundaries of the patentee’s rights. Occasionally, however, claim language contains errors, such as typographical mistakes or incorrect numbering. Courts possess very limited authority to correct such errors. The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has emphasized that judicial correction is appropriate only in rare circumstances, where (1) the error is evident from the face of the patent, and (2) the proposed correction is the sole reasonable interpretation in view of the claim language, specification, and prosecution history. See Group One, Ltd. v. Hallmark Cards, Inc., 407 F.3d 1297, 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005) and Novo Indus., L.P. v. Micro Molds Corp., 350 F.3d 1348, 1357 (Fed. Cir. 2003).
Client Alert | 5 min read | 11.26.25
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.25.25
Brussels Court Clarifies the EU’s SPC Manufacturing Waiver Regulation Rules
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.24.25
