Articles Posted in Product Liability

Published on: August 12, 2025

Recall of Magnetic Floating Stackers Due to Risk of Serious Injury or Death

Tegu’s Magnetic Floating Stackers are children’s wooden toys that have a base, six pieces of different colors that stack, two posts, and two figures. All of these connect with magnets. Recently, Tegu recalled the Magnetic Floating Stackers toys due to the risk that a child would ingest the magnet, risk of serious injury or death, and a violation of the mandatory standard for toy magnets. If your child was harmed after ingesting magnets from the Teju magnetic floating stackers, you should call the seasoned Chicago-based product liability lawyers of Moll Law Group. Billions have been recovered in cases with which we’ve been involved.

Call Moll Law Group About Your Magnetic Floating Stackers Claim

The Tegu Magnetic Floating Stackers were recalled on July 31, 2025—the recall affects 25,850 units in the country. The reason that the toys violate the mandatory standard for this type of toy is because the high-powered magnets in them can get loose and break free from the toy, presenting a danger to children. The consumed magnets may attract each other within a child’s digestive system. The result may be twisting, blockage of the intestine, perforations, blood poisoning, and even death. So far, there have been 31 reports to Tegu of magnets detaching from the toy stacker.

The affected model numbers are STA-BGY-801T (Rainbow) and STA-BTP-806T (Big Top). These were sold for around $40 at toy, children’s stores, and specialty stores around the country, and also on Tegu.com and Amazon.com from August 2018-April 2025). Consumers have been asked to take the product from children and reach out to the manufacturer for instructions to receive a free replacement stacker toy. However, if your child was injured or killed due to ingesting magnets, you should keep any remaining pieces in case they’re needed as evidence.

Continue reading →

Published on: July 22, 2025

Select Newport Ventilators and Service Parts Have Been Recalled.

By Moll Law Group

hospice-4135835_640-e1752357257868 In May of this year, the manufacturer Medtronic voluntarily recalled Newport HT70 and HT70 Plus ventilators, along with specific service parts related to those models. Consumers were asked to remove these devices from use and substitute an alternative ventilator for patients. In June, the FDA designated the voluntary recall as a Class I recall—the most serious type of recall as it means the product has a reasonable possibility of causing severe medical problems or death. If you were injured or a loved one died due to Newport ventilators, you should call the seasoned Chicago-based lawyers of Moll Law Group. Billions have been recovered in cases across the country with which we’ve been involved.

Consult Moll Law Group About Your Newport Ventilator Claim

Ventilators, as their name indicates, provide a patient with ventilation, helping him or her to breathe by themselves. When a patient can’t breathe on their own, the result may be lowered oxygen levels and heightened carbon dioxide in the patient’s body, which in turn can result in brain injury or death. One family of recalled ventilators, HT70, is meant to be used at home to provide continuous or intermittent positive pressure mechanical ventilatory support for people that need mechanical ventilation. They are also used in cases involving infant or pediatric patients in subacute care, a hospital, an emergency department, and for emergency response situations, specifically because this population is at heightened risk of death or injury due to unpredictable ventilator failures.

The company has advised that certain of its ventilators no longer be used in clinics. Customer complaints led to Medtronic finding two distinct capacitators that could and cause the ventilator to shut down while it was being used or the shutdown alert alarm not sounding properly. When a ventilator experiences one of these failures and adequate ventilation isn’t provided, the person using the ventilator might not be able to breathe by themselves.

Continue reading →

Published on: July 8, 2025

Tomatoes Recalled in 14 States Due to Risk of Deadly Salmonella

By Moll Law Group

tomatoes-769999_640 Two brands of tomatoes from Williams Farms Repack, LLC were recalled in May in 14 states because of the risk of salmonella contamination. A little over a month ago, the recall was elevated to a Class I recall—meaning that the tomatoes carry a deadly risk. The affected tomatoes include 3 count packages, 10-pound boxes, 25-pound boxes and 60-count 2-layer boxes. One set of recalled tomatoes were four-count Vine Ripe tomatoes sold by Gordon Food Service Stores in 11 states, which included Illinois. Salmonella contamination can affect many different kinds of food, and it’s important not to consume food recalled due to salmonella, particularly food subject to a Class I recall. If you suffered salmonella or a lost a loved one due to salmonella contracted from food, you should call the seasoned Chicago-based product liability lawyers of Moll Law Group. Billions have been recovered in cases with which we’ve been involved and represent clients around the country.

Call Moll Law Group About Your Salmonella Tomato Claim

Salmonella can range from mild to serious. Symptoms include abdominal pain, diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, and fever. When it’s serious—as when the tomatoes have been subject to a Class I recall—people who are infected by need to be hospitalized. The infection could cause arthritis, endocarditis, and arterial infections. Members of vulnerable groups, such as small children, frail elderly people, and others who are immune-suppressed or have a weakened immune system, may die. In this case, the FDA said that no illnesses had been reported from the tomatoes thus far, but recommended consumers toss out the tomatoes or return them if unopened. If you bought these tomatoes and froze them, they should not be consumed.

The tomatoes initially at issue were sold in plastic clamshells with “VINE RIPE TOMATOES” printed on the label. Labeling also includes the words “Packed by Ray & Mascari Inc.” They were distributed between April 23-28, 2025, the FDA explained in a separate notice. But the tomatoes subject to a Class I recall come in a range of sizes: 4×5 2 layer, 60ct 2layer, 3ct trays in the Williams Farms Repack label, and 5×6 25lb, 6×6 25lb H&C Farms Label.

Continue reading →

Published on: July 1, 2025

Plaintiffs Bring Motion to Centralize Port Catheter Litigation

By Moll Law Group

happens-770461_6401-e1750645915222 When there are a number of different cases pending in various districts against common defendants and featuring common factual and legal issues, it may be appropriate for plaintiffs to seek to have the cases centralized in a single district. When cases are centralized in this way, pretrial proceedings and discovery can be streamlined. Centralization also prevents judges’ inconsistent rulings on various pretrial matters, particularly evidentiary challenges. Recently, the plaintiffs in 19 lawsuits moved to centralize the port catheter litigation in the Western District of Missouri. These are lawsuits brought against defendants AngioDynamics, Inc., Navilyst Medical Inc., and PFM Medical, Inc in connection with the port catheters they manufacture—these are medical devices used to obtain easy access to veins and administer long-term intravenous treatments like chemotherapy. Patients have reported serious injuries believed to be the result of the devices. Many product liability lawsuits have been filed against the manufacturers.

Call Moll Law Group About Your Port Catheter Products Claim

The port catheter litigation involves 23 pending lawsuits in 16 districts. There are 33 possible tag-along actions. Defendants AngioDynamics, Inc. and Navilyst Medical Inc. opposed centralization in Missouri. Alternatively, they suggested centralizing the actions in the Northern District of New York, the Southern District of California, or the Middle District of Alabama. Likewise, defendant PFM Medical, Inc., opposed the plaintiffs’ motion and suggested centralization in the Southern District of California and didn’t object to centralization in the Northern District of New York.

The United States Judicial Panel found that the lawsuits involved common factual questions and that centralizing the matters in the Southern District of California would serve the parties’ and witness’ convenience and promote just and efficient conduct in the lawsuits.

Continue reading →

Published on: June 24, 2025

FSIS Issues Public Health Alert for Ground Beef Products

By Moll Law Group

The United States Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) recently issued a public health alert for one-pound vacuum packed packages of Organic Rancher 95% lean and 15% fat ground beef. These were products sold at Whole Foods Market that carry the risk of E. coli O157:H7 contamination and have a use or freeze-by dates of June 19 or June 20. If you were made sick by Organic Rancher ground beef, you should call the seasoned Chicago-based product liability lawyers of Moll Law Group.

Consult Moll Law Group About Your Food Safety Claim

The raw ground beef product was made on May 22, 2025, and May 23, 2025, by Organic Ranger. In Illinois and other states, the products were available from May 26 through June 3. The label on the vacuum-packed containers of raw ground beef has expiration dates of June 19, 2025, and June 20, 2025. Because the beef isn’t available in stores anymore, the FSIS issued a public alert rather than a recall. In addition to being shipped to Illinois, the ground beef was also shipped to Connecticut, Georgia, and Maryland, as well as Whole Foods Market retail locations around the country. The vacuum-packed packages were processed in Vermont and have an establishment number Est. 4027 inside the USDA mark of inspection.

The FSIS warned consumers to only consume ground beef cooked to an internal temperature of at least 160 degrees Fahrenheit.

Continue reading →

Published on: June 17, 2025

WeHwupe Adult Portable Bed Rails Recalled

By Moll Law Group

ai-generated-8685102_1280-e1749420343976 Recently, on May 29, 2025, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) recalled WeHwupe Adult Portable Bed Rails. The reason for the recall was that the bed rails deviate from federal regulations for this type of product; in that deviation, they present serious risks of entrapment and death by asphyxiation. If your loved one was injured by entrapment or died due to asphyxiation because of the recalled WeHwupe bed rails, you should call the seasoned Chicago-based lawyers of Moll Law Group.

Contact Moll Law Group About Your Bed Rail Claim

The WeHwupe branded adult portable bed rail, models BRX-8002 and BRX-8003, were recalled because when they’re attached to a bed, the person using the bed can get entrapped within the bed rail or between the side of the mattress and the bed rail. The bed rails also don’t carry the requisite warning labels. Around 94,800 bed rails made of white metal tubing with a gray foam rubber grip handle and including a fabric pouch were impacted. The WeHwupe company has gotten one report involving the BRX-8002 model bed rail. It broke while being used and caused the user to fall and get hurt.

Unfortunately, the bed rails themselves don’t carry the model number. Rather these are found only on the assembly instructions. The BRX-8002 is 22 inches wide and has an adjustable height between 1.8 – 21.5 inches. Meanwhile the BRX-8003 contains two support legs and has a height of between 20.2-22.6 inches and a width of 23.6 inches. Made in China, bed rails were sold online at Walmart.com and Amazon.com between September 2023-January 2025 for $33-$43.

Continue reading →

Published on: June 10, 2025

FDA Elevates Tomato Recall to Highest Risk Warning

By Moll Law Group

tomatoes-4434850_640-e1749419768849 A tomato recall was announced in May in connection with possible salmonella contamination. It affects three states, and recently was upgraded to Class I recall, which is the highest recall designation for health dangers. It means that the FDA believes that there is a reasonable probability that the recalled product will cause serious harms to health or even death. The affected products are from Williams Farms Repack. If you suffered from illness due to recalled tomatoes, you should call the seasoned Chicago-based product liability attorneys of Moll Law Group. Billions have been recovered in cases with which we’ve been involved.

Contact Moll Law Group About Your Food Safety Claim

Salmonella is a kind of bacteria that is one of the most common causes of fatal foodborne illness and should be taken seriously. The distributor Williams Farms Repack LLC initiated a tomato recall on May 2 after it was told by its supplier H&C Farms that their tomatoes carried the danger of salmonella contamination. Nine package sizes of tomatoes sold to wholesalers and distributors in South Carolina, North Carolina, and George between April 23, 2025 and April 28, 2025. These were affected tomato packages: XL 18-pound loose, lot code R4467; 60ct 18-pound loose, lot codes R4467, R4470; 4×5 two layer, Williams Farms Repack label, lot code R4467; 4×4 2 layer, lot code R4467; Combo 25 pound, lot code R4467; 6×6 25 pound, H&C Farms label, lot codes R4467, R4470; 5×6 25 pound, H&C Farms label, lot code R4467; 3 count trays, Williams Farms Repack label, lot code R4467; and 60 count two layer, Williams Farms Repack label, lot code R4467.

Around the same time, Ray & Mascari Inc. recalled tomatoes in 11 states. The latter received the FDA’s warning of a high hazard, a class I designation. When the recalls were announced, there had been no illnesses or deaths reported. The affected Ray & Mascari, Inc. tomatoes come in packs of four that are sold in plastic clamshell containers and labeled with “Vine Ripe Tomatoes You can identify the source of these affected tomatoes because the containers are also labeled with “Packed by Ray & Mascar, Inc.” Gordon Food Services Stores in 11 states sold the recalled tomatoes out of a cardboard box that includes 12 clamshell containers.

Continue reading →

Published on: June 3, 2025

FDA Warns of Itching Risks with Popular Allergy Medications

By Moll Law Group

woman-698943_640 Seasonal allergies are triggered by pollen and blooming flowers and other plants. Allergy symptoms include runny noses, itchy eyes, sneezing, and sometimes coughing. Patients have been prescribed medications, and in some cases, take over-the-counter allergy medication. Recently, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warned the public that when patients stop long-term use of Zyrtec or Xyzal, oral allergy medications, may experience rare but severe itching. If you or your child suffered severe adverse effects from Zyrtec, Xyzal or another allergy medication, you should call the experienced Chicago-based product liability attorneys of the Moll Law Firm about whether you have a case against the manufacturer or others in the chain of distribution.

Call Moll Law Group About Your Claim

Cetirizine (Zyrtec) and levocetirizine (Xyzal) are antihistamines, which are mobilized to stop histamines released during people’s allergic responses to seasonal allergens like pollen and grass. The former was approved in 1995 and became an over-the-counter medicine in 2008. The latter was approved for prescriptions in 2007 and was made an over-the-counter drug in 2017.

The American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology has cited information from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that indicates about 1 out of 3 adults and 1 out of 4 children in the United States have reported their food allergy, eczema, or seasonal allergy. Over 100 million people in the country have stated they have allergy symptoms. The FDA’s public warning noted that people purchased over 80 million packs of popular allergy medications in 2022.

Continue reading →

Published on: May 27, 2025

SharkNinja Recalls 1.8 Million Multi-Function Pressure Cookers

By Moll Law Group

food-6796435_640-e1747350401624 On May 1, 2025, SharkNinja Foodi OP Series Multi-Function Pressure Cookers were recalled due to the risk of burn injuries. The danger is that the lid of the pressure cooker could be opened by consumers while food was cooking, which could result in the hot material inside escaping and burning the consumer who’d opened the pot or bystanders. Around 1,846,400 pressure cooker units in the United States have been recalled. All of the Ninja Foodi OP300 Series Multi-Function Pressure Cookers are involved. If you were burned as a result of using a Ninja Foodi OP300 Series Multi-Function Pressure Cookers, you should consult the seasoned Chicago-based lawyers of Moll Law Group. Billions have been recovered in cases with which we’ve been involved.

Consult Moll Law Group About Your Claim

The SharkNinja lids may pop open while the pressure cooker is in use. When hot food escapes from the inside, the result may be severe or even catastrophic burn injuries. About 106 people have reported they were injured by using the SharkNinja and over 50 of these people reported that they suffered second or third degree burns to their face or body. More than 20 lawsuits have been filed against SharkNinja.

Affected SharkNinja pressure cookers were sold at Walmart, Costco, Sam’s Club, Amazon and Target stores around the country. Online retailers of the product are at www.Ninjakitchen.com, www.walmart.com, www.costco.com, www.samsclub.com, www.amazon.com and www.target.com from January 2019 through March 2025. The product sells for about $200.

Continue reading →

Published on: May 20, 2025

Failure to Disclose Increased Risk to Leqembi and Kisunla Patients

By Moll Law Group

hospital-834150_640 Two Alzheimer’s drugs Leqembi and Kisunla were approved by the FDA to treat mild dementia or a pre-Alzheimer’s condition called mild cognitive impairment. Data had suggested that Leqembi could slow cognitive decline in Alzheimer’s patients by five months over a period of 18 months for patients who had only mild symptoms. Two thousand volunteers had agreed to test Leqembi in clinical studies. However, it turns out these drugs may also increase the risk for brain bleeds and swelling in patients with certain genetic profiles—and patients may not have been given enough information. If you suffered brain bleeds or swelling during a clinical trial for Leqembi or Kisunla, you may be able to recover compensation.

Call Moll Law Group About Your Claim

Investigation shows that drug manufacturers Eisai and Eli Lilly may not have disclosed to certain people in their clinical trials that they were more vulnerable to brain bleeding or swelling. The clinical trial for Leqembi had 274 volunteers without the manufacturer alerting them that they were at especially high risk to develop brain injuries. Eli Lilly also failed to tell volunteers in its Kisunla studies of increased risks, and dozens of those volunteers suffered severe brain bleeding.

Patients in the clinical studies should have received adequate information about the increased risks they faced due to their genetic profiles. Generally, patients must give informed consent before they take a medication for the study; patients cannot give informed consent if they have not been told the risks of taking a medication. In both of the trials, the volunteers were required to sign consent forms that let them know people with certain profiles faced greater risk of brain injuries while taking the drugs and that while participants would be tested for those risks, they wouldn’t be told the results.

Continue reading →