<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title></title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.psblaw.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.psblaw.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 May 2012 22:09:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
		<item>
		<title>Senate Votes to Make Black Boxes Mandatory in 2015 Autos</title>
		<link>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/16/senate-votes-to-make-black-boxes-mandatory-in-2015-autos/</link>
		<comments>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/16/senate-votes-to-make-black-boxes-mandatory-in-2015-autos/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 May 2012 22:09:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Los Angeles Personal Injury Lawyer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Category]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[car safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Department of Transportation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[laws]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.psblaw.com/?p=5778</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[They’re mandatory in airplanes, but very soon, the device known as a black box might soon be required to be installed in motor vehicles as well. The new transportation bill that was just approved by the United States Senate has a clause that makes these event recorders mandatory on all vehicles of the 2015 model [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>They’re mandatory in airplanes, but very soon, the device known as a black box might soon be required to be installed in motor vehicles as well.</p>
<p>The new transportation bill that <a href="http://www.autoblog.com/2012/05/14/senate-oks-mandatory-black-boxes-in-cars-for-2015-house-expecte/" target="_blank">was just approved</a> by the United States Senate has a clause that makes these event recorders mandatory on all vehicles of the 2015 model year and later.  A similar measure is now being considered in the House of Representatives as well, and if reports are to believed, that legislative body will likely be approving the mandate too.</p>
<p>The event recorder, or black box, if you will, will adhere to standards set by the Department of Transportation.  The DOT has advised that such boxes gather data under a variety of different metrics.  These 15 categories include such things as what time the firing of the airbags occurred in a crash, what the position of the throttle was, and in which direction the vehicle was accelerating.  These are just to name a few.</p>
<p>Some worry, though, that this is an invasion of privacy.  To that end, though the Senate version of the bill stipulates that the owner of the vehicle is also the owner of the data in the box.  Therefore, any law enforcement officers who want to see the information must first obtain a warrant.  It should be noted, though, that in the event of an emergency, rescue personnel can access the data if it’s critical to helping them do their jobs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/16/senate-votes-to-make-black-boxes-mandatory-in-2015-autos/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>FDA Warns Against Taking Fingolimid with Certain Meds</title>
		<link>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/16/fda-warns-against-taking-fingolimid-with-certain-meds/</link>
		<comments>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/16/fda-warns-against-taking-fingolimid-with-certain-meds/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 May 2012 22:05:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Los Angeles Personal Injury Lawyer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal Category]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drug risk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drug safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FDA warning]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.psblaw.com/?p=5776</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a demonstration of how crucial it is for tests to be conducted even after a drug is proven safe, the Food and Drug Administration is warning consumers about a drug that might react negatively with another substance. The organization recently received a report about a person dying after being administered the first dose of [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In a demonstration of how crucial it is for tests to be conducted even after a drug is proven safe, the Food and Drug Administration is <a href="http://www.cardiovascularbusiness.com/index.php?option=com_articles&amp;view=article&amp;id=34033:fda-dont-take-ms-drug-with-prior-cv-condition-stroke" target="_blank">warning consumers</a> about a drug that might react negatively with another substance.</p>
<p>The organization recently received a report about a person dying after being administered the first dose of fingolimid, a multiple sclerosis drug.  After evaluating the circumstances behind that case, the FDA has now said that persons currently on certain medications that help to prevent arrhythmia or who have had a recent stroke or heart attack should probably not take fingolimid, which is used in Novartis and Gilenya.</p>
<p>It could not be proven that in the case studied or other post market and clinical trial data that the fingolimid contributed to any deaths looked into.  However, the FDA has expressed concerns that the drug might lead to bradycardia, and recommends that, after the first dose, the person taking the drug be monitored carefully.  This monitoring should be even longer, they say, in people who are more at risk of suffering bradycardia.</p>
<p>The FDA says that monitoring should include measurements of blood pressure and pulse rate every hour once the first dose is given.  They also think that an electrocardiogram test should be administered both before and after the period of testing is over.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/16/fda-warns-against-taking-fingolimid-with-certain-meds/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>FDA Finds Numerous Safety Violations at Dog Food Plant</title>
		<link>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/16/fda-finds-numerous-safety-violations-at-dog-food-plant/</link>
		<comments>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/16/fda-finds-numerous-safety-violations-at-dog-food-plant/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 May 2012 22:01:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Los Angeles Personal Injury Lawyer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Foodborne Illness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News Category]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[product recall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dog food recall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FDA investigations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[foodborne illness]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.psblaw.com/?p=5774</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If you’ve been following the news, you may have seen something about the numerous dog food recalls that have had to be issued because of manufacturing errors that led to possible salmonella contamination at a South Carolina plant.  Well, the Food and Drug Administration conducted an investigation, and today they released their results. The FDA [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you’ve been following the news, you may have seen something about the numerous dog food recalls that have had to be issued because of manufacturing errors that led to possible salmonella contamination at a South Carolina plant.  Well, the Food and Drug Administration conducted an investigation, and today they <a href="http://foodpoisoningbulletin.com/2012/food-safety-issues-at-diamond-pet-food-plant/" target="_blank">released their results</a>.</p>
<p>The FDA went through the Diamond Pet Foods plant on April 12, and they found four main failures that compromised the safety of the dog food products and led to 15 people getting sick throughout Canada and the United States.</p>
<p>First, the company failed to include hand sanitizing areas at appropriate coordinates within the plant, namely in those places where employees could expect to make direct contact with finished food.</p>
<p>There was also a failure of plant personnel to conduct proper microbiological analysis on animal fat.  This is done to ensure that pathogens aren’t introduced into the final product, which is exactly what could happen when an employee touches the food or equipment, as the FDA witnessed happening.</p>
<p>The plant also did not adequately maintain such things as containers, utensils, or equipment.  Because of this, certain pieces of equipment had feed residue trapped in hard-to-sanitize gouges.  The fourth failure, which ties into what was just mentioned, has to do with the fact that duct tape and cardboard were used on equipment.  Such things are nearly impossible to properly clean properly, and not unexpectedly, such items maintained food residue, further compromising safety.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/16/fda-finds-numerous-safety-violations-at-dog-food-plant/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Five Companies Agree to Assist in Recall of Tots in Mind Crib Tents</title>
		<link>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/16/five-companies-agree-to-assist-in-recall-of-tots-in-mind-crib-tents/</link>
		<comments>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/16/five-companies-agree-to-assist-in-recall-of-tots-in-mind-crib-tents/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 May 2012 21:58:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Los Angeles Personal Injury Lawyer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Child Safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News Category]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[product recall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[crib recall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[entrapment hazard]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strangulation hazard]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.psblaw.com/?p=5772</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sometimes, as you’ll see in this next story, it’s up to retailers to step up to the plate when a company that sells a defective product stops operating. Tots in Mind, Inc., who was responsible for manufacturing a number of defective crib tents and play yard tents, has gone out of business.  Those tents were [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sometimes, as you’ll see in this next story, it’s up to retailers to step up to the plate when a company that sells a defective product stops operating.</p>
<p>Tots in Mind, Inc., who was responsible for manufacturing a number of defective crib tents and play yard tents, has gone out of business.  Those tents were determined to have a safety hazard, and now, to make sure that the items can still get returned properly, Bed Bath &amp; Beyond, Buy Buy Baby, Toys R Us, Babies R Us, Amazon, Walmart, and the Burlington Coat Factory <a href="http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml12/12179.html" target="_blank">have all agreed</a> to give any consumers who purchased the items from one of the aforementioned stores either store credit or a full refund, depending on the store.</p>
<p>The products in question pose an entrapment and a strangulation hazard.  It was because of these hazards that a recall had to be initiated on July 15, 2010.  There have been 27 reported instances of the item malfunctioning and endangering the child inside.  In one of those instances, a boy of just two years old died because he became trapped between rails.  And in another case, another two year old suffered a brain injury due to the crib tent inverting and harming the child.</p>
<p>330,000 units have the potential defect, and various models are encompassed by the recall.  The best way for customers to identity the product is to look for a two inch wide Tots in Mind logo near the top of the tent.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/16/five-companies-agree-to-assist-in-recall-of-tots-in-mind-crib-tents/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Volvo motor coaches recalled due to insufficient emergency exits</title>
		<link>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/16/volvo-motor-coaches-recalled-due-to-insufficient-emergency-exits/</link>
		<comments>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/16/volvo-motor-coaches-recalled-due-to-insufficient-emergency-exits/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 May 2012 18:21:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Los Angeles Personal Injury Lawyer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[product recall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bus recall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vehicle recall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[volvo recall]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.psblaw.com/?p=5769</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Prevost Car Incorporated, in cooperation with a request from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, has issued a voluntary recall for 27 of its Volvo 9700 Motor Coaches from model years 2009 to 2013. This recall has been announced due to an insufficient number of emergency exit windows. The motor coaches affected by this recall [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p class="MsoNormal">Prevost Car Incorporated, in cooperation with a request from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, has issued a <a href="http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/recalls/results.cfm?rcl_id=12V205000&amp;searchtype=quicksearch&amp;summary=true&amp;refurl=rss" target="_blank">voluntary recall</a> for 27 of its Volvo 9700 Motor Coaches from model years 2009 to 2013. This recall has been announced due to an insufficient number of emergency exit windows. The motor coaches affected by this recall do not offer passengers enough emergency exit windows to comply with federal safety guidelines regulating the standards for bus emergency exits and window retention and release. If one of the motor coaches affected by this recall were involved in an emergency situation requiring passengers to make a quick exit, the safety of some passengers may be endangered by a delay in evacuation procedures caused by a less than sufficient number of emergency exit windows. If the passenger is unable to exit the vehicle in a timely manner, the risk of sustaining personal injury is increased. Prevost Car Incorporated has announced a plan to inform the owners of affected vehicles of the potential safety hazard posed by the motor coaches non-compliant safety feature design. Consumers in possession of the affected motor coaches may return them to an authorized dealership where an additional emergency exit will be installed at no additional charge in order to make the bus compliant with federally mandated safety standards. More information on this recall can be obtained by contacting the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s Vehicle Safety Hotline and reference campaign identification number 12V205000.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/16/volvo-motor-coaches-recalled-due-to-insufficient-emergency-exits/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Folding stools recalled after consumers report unexpected breakage</title>
		<link>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/16/folding-stools-recalled-after-consumers-report-unexpected-breakage/</link>
		<comments>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/16/folding-stools-recalled-after-consumers-report-unexpected-breakage/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 May 2012 18:18:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Los Angeles Personal Injury Lawyer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Category]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[product recall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Consumer Product Safety Commission]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[personal injury risk]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.psblaw.com/?p=5765</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In response to a request from the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission, Kennedy International Incorporated has announced a voluntary recall for more than 1.6 million units of its folding step stools due to a fall risk posed by the possibility of unexpected breakage during routine use. Kennedy International Incorporated is a product distributor headquartered [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p class="MsoNormal">In response to a request from the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission, Kennedy International Incorporated has announced a <a href="http://news.consumerreports.org/safety/2012/05/folding-step-stools-recalled-due-to-break-dangers.html" target="_blank">voluntary recall</a> for more than 1.6 million units of its folding step stools due to a fall risk posed by the possibility of unexpected breakage during routine use. Kennedy International Incorporated is a product distributor headquartered in Dayton, New Jersey. This folding step stool recall comes as a response to at least 15 consumer complaints made to the company in response to the step stools breaking or cracking during routine use. This recall follows the recall of multiple models of non-folding step stools for similar issues, including a recall of more than 340,000 stools sold at Target retail outlets across the United States. At least three of these incidents have reportedly led to injuries including in one case, a broken leg. An estimated 1.6 million Kennedy Folding Step Stools are being recalled throughout the United States. The Kennedy Folding Step Stools affected by this recall were distributed nationwide to retail outlets including Marshall’s, TJ Maxx, and HomeGoods, where they were sold from January 2010 to January 2012 for a retail price ranging from $8 to $12. Consumers in possession of Kennedy Folding Step Stools affected by this recall are advised to discontinue their use immediately and contact Kennedy International to receive instructions for returning the product for a refund of the full purchase price.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/16/folding-stools-recalled-after-consumers-report-unexpected-breakage/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Stok Gas grills recalled for fuel leak, fire hazard</title>
		<link>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/16/stok-gas-grills-recalled-for-fuel-leak-fire-hazard/</link>
		<comments>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/16/stok-gas-grills-recalled-for-fuel-leak-fire-hazard/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 May 2012 18:12:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Los Angeles Personal Injury Lawyer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[product recall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fire hazard]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fuel leak]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.psblaw.com/?p=5760</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[One World Technologies, in cooperation with a request from the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission, has announced a voluntary recall for an estimated 89,000 of its gas powered barbecue grills. The recall comes as a response to more than 560 consumer complaints received by One World Technologies product distributors related to leaking regulators. The [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p class="MsoNormal">One World Technologies, in cooperation with a request from the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission, has announced a <a href="http://news.consumerreports.org/safety/2012/04/89000-stok-gas-grills-recalled-for-faulty-regulators.html" target="_blank">voluntary recall</a> for an estimated 89,000 of its gas powered barbecue grills. The recall comes as a response to more than 560 consumer complaints received by One World Technologies product distributors related to leaking regulators. The leaking regulators pose a fire hazard and a severe burn risk, according to the Consumer Product Safety Commision. The gas grills affected by this recall are the Stok Quattro (equipped with four burners) and the Stok Island (a round grill equipped with two burners) model gas powered barbecue grills. These grills are equipped with regulators imprinted with date codes ranging from 1046 to 1143 on the back and model number AZF on the front. These grills were distributed for sale at Home Depot retail hardware stores throughout the United States between March of 2011 and February of 2012 for a purchase price ranging from $79 to $350. One World Technologies has announced plans to send owners of affected grills replacement regulators at no additional cost. Consumers in possession of grills affected by this recall should discontinue their use until a new regulator has been obtained and installed. More information on this recall can be obtained from the Stok Grills website or by calling One World Technologies directly. Knowingly selling a recalled product is forbidden under United States law, according to the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/16/stok-gas-grills-recalled-for-fuel-leak-fire-hazard/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Salmonella contamination prompts Dole bagged salad recall</title>
		<link>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/16/salmonella-contamination-prompts-dole-bagged-salad-recall/</link>
		<comments>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/16/salmonella-contamination-prompts-dole-bagged-salad-recall/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 May 2012 18:10:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Los Angeles Personal Injury Lawyer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Foodborne Illness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[product recall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[foodborne illness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Salmonella contamination]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.psblaw.com/?p=5756</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The potential for salmonella contamination has prompted Dole Fresh Vegetables to issue a voluntary recall for more than 750 cases of its Seven Lettuces bagged salad mix. The United States Food and Drug Administration advises consumers who have purchased bagged salad mix affected by this recall discard the salad mix without attempting to consume it. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p class="MsoNormal">The potential for salmonella contamination has prompted Dole Fresh Vegetables to issue a <a href="http://news.consumerreports.org/safety/2012/04/dole-bagged-salads-recalled-due-to-salmonella-risk.html" target="_blank">voluntary recall</a> for more than 750 cases of its Seven Lettuces bagged salad mix. The United States Food and Drug Administration advises consumers who have purchased bagged salad mix affected by this recall discard the salad mix without attempting to consume it. The Seven Lettuces bagged salad mix affected by this recall is packaged in bags imprinted with a universal product code number of 7143001057, a manufacturer’s product code of 0577N089112A, and an April 11, 2012 expiration date. These bagged salad mixes were distributed for sale in grocery stores across 15 states, including: Wisconsin, Massachusetts, New York, Illinois, Florida, Indiana, Maryland, Mississippi, Michigan, Ohio, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Tennessee, and Alabama. If salmonella contaminated food is ingested, it can cause serious food borne illness marked by symptoms including stomach pain, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea. To avoid contracting a food borne illness, the FDA recommends consumers wash all prepackaged produce before use, buy products with the latest expiration dates available, and avoid storing them with meat to reduce the risk of cross contamination. While a thorough rinsing of the bagged salad mix will not prevent consumers from being made ill by products contaminated with salmonella, it may remove residual soil that potentially contains pesticides or other harmful chemicals. Consumers seeking more information on this recall may contact the manufacturer directly or call the FDA’s consumer hotline.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/16/salmonella-contamination-prompts-dole-bagged-salad-recall/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Husqvarna string trimmers recalled for fuel leak hazard</title>
		<link>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/16/husqvarna-string-trimmers-recalled-for-fuel-leak-hazard/</link>
		<comments>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/16/husqvarna-string-trimmers-recalled-for-fuel-leak-hazard/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 May 2012 18:06:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Los Angeles Personal Injury Lawyer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[product recall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fuel leak hazard]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hedge trimmer recall]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.psblaw.com/?p=5751</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In cooperation with the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission, Husqvarna Professional Products has issued a voluntary recall for an estimated 26,000 string and hedge trimmers due to a possible fuel leak hazard. Approximately 6,500 units of two models of Husqvarna hedge trimmers, the 122HD45 and 122HD60, are affected by this recall, along with a [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p class="MsoNormal">In cooperation with the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission, Husqvarna Professional Products has issued a <a href="http://news.consumerreports.org/safety/2012/04/husqvarna-recalls-26000-string-and-hedge-trimmers-for-fuel-leaks.html" target="_blank">voluntary recall</a> for an estimated 26,000 string and hedge trimmers due to a possible fuel leak hazard. Approximately 6,500 units of two models of Husqvarna hedge trimmers, the 122HD45 and 122HD60, are affected by this recall, along with a single model of string trimmer, the Husqvarna 122C. The fuel tanks in these trimmers may contain a defective rubber spacing device meant to secure the fuel line in the proper position. The rubber spacer may leak fuel, causing a fire hazard. Grass Trimmer Model 122Cs affected by this recall an estimated 19,500 units, are imprinted with serial numbers ranging between 2011 17 00001 and 2011 52 99999. The serial number can be found on a black plate on the bottom of the trimmer’s muffler side. Hedge trimmers affected by this recall are imprinted with serial numbers ranging between 2011 17 00001 and 2011 52 99999. The serial number on the hedge trimmers can be found on a black plate affixed to the gearbox on the trimmer’s lower section. The trimmers affected by this recall were sold at Sears and Lowe’s hardware stores, as well as other authorized Husqvarna dealers between May 2011 and January 2012 for a price ranging from $150 to $320. Owners of affected trimmers should discontinue their use and return them to the original place of purchase for a free repair. More information about this recall can be obtained from the Husqvarna website.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/16/husqvarna-string-trimmers-recalled-for-fuel-leak-hazard/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>California Senates Wants Tougher Cell Laws, But Some Are Opposed</title>
		<link>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/15/california-senates-wants-tougher-cell-laws-but-some-are-opposed/</link>
		<comments>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/15/california-senates-wants-tougher-cell-laws-but-some-are-opposed/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 21:57:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Los Angeles Personal Injury Lawyer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Distracted Driving]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News Category]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cell phone laws]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[distracted driving]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[texting while driving]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.psblaw.com/?p=5748</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Let this be a warning to all those people who continue to drive while texting or talking on a handheld cellphone:  you might soon be facing even steeper penalties. That’s because the State Senate yesterday voted 24-9 to adopt a bill that would increase the fines levied against those persons caught in breach of California’s [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let this be a warning to all those people who continue to drive while texting or talking on a handheld cellphone:  you might soon be facing even steeper penalties.</p>
<p>That’s because the State Senate yesterday voted 24-9 to <a href="http://www.kesq.com/news/Cell-phone-penalties-would-rise-under-pending-bill/-/233092/13391888/-/hkq927/-/index.html" target="_blank">adopt a bill</a> that would increase the fines levied against those persons caught in breach of California’s ban against texting while driving and talking on a cellular device that’s not handsfree.  The bill has been passed on to the State Assembly.</p>
<p>The new bill would make it so that first time violators have to pay $30, a significant $10 increase from what’s currently on the books.  However, this number jumps to $199 when court fees are taken into account.  For persons who have already committed the offense yet get caught again, they’ll be forced to pay around $371.  Their driver’s record will also incur a point.</p>
<p>Not everyone seems completely sold on this idea, though.  Although the proponents of the bill cite statistics which show a decrease in both distracted driving and death resulting from same, other senators believe that regular citizens think the measure is trivial.  One senator stated that he would like to see more emphasis placed on erratic drivers, not just people with phones to their ear or in their hands.</p>
<p>The bill still has a ways to go.  Last year, the governor vetoed a similar measure that drastically raised the first time penalty to $50.  The governor reportedly nixed the bill because he thought that what was on the books was already sufficient.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/15/california-senates-wants-tougher-cell-laws-but-some-are-opposed/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Lower Income Cities Tend to Have More Pedestrian Crashes</title>
		<link>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/15/lower-income-cities-tend-to-have-more-pedestrian-crashes/</link>
		<comments>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/15/lower-income-cities-tend-to-have-more-pedestrian-crashes/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 21:52:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Los Angeles Personal Injury Lawyer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Category]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pedestrian accident]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pedestrian safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[safety research]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.psblaw.com/?p=5746</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The city of Newark, New Jersey, is being used as an example of the correlation between an increase in pedestrian collisions and a generally lower income average. Researchers believe this correlation has been established for two primary reasons.  The first is that people with low income are often unable to afford a car, and so [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The city of Newark, New Jersey, is being used <a href="http://www.wnyc.org/articles/new-jersey-news/2012/may/14/poor-more-likely-be-hit-cars/" target="_blank">as an example</a> of the correlation between an increase in pedestrian collisions and a generally lower income average.</p>
<p>Researchers believe this correlation has been established for two primary reasons.  The first is that people with low income are often unable to afford a car, and so they’re left to walk a lot more often than persons in areas where the income median is significantly higher.  The second possible influence has to do with the fact that lower income areas can’t provide the type of infrastructure that could protect pedestrians.  This infrastructure could include something as simple as pedestrian crossing signals or traffic lights.</p>
<p>Take Newark, for example.  Statistics show that around 500 people are hit by cars while walking in that city.  Newark’s average income per household is also less than half of what the state’s median is.  One intersection alone, that of Park Avenue and 4th Street, saw dozens of crashes and three serious pedestrian strikes over just 18 months.</p>
<p>To combat this growing problem, the city has approved a $27 million improvement package that will attempt to make roads safer for pedestrians and cyclists alike.  Sadly, though, some roads won’t get the tender loving care that they might need.  That’s because certain roads actually are under the jurisdiction of Essex County, not the city.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/15/lower-income-cities-tend-to-have-more-pedestrian-crashes/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Congress Considers Bill That Extends FDA&#8217;s Foreign Inspection Power</title>
		<link>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/15/congress-considers-bill-that-extends-fdas-foreign-inspection-power/</link>
		<comments>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/15/congress-considers-bill-that-extends-fdas-foreign-inspection-power/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 21:47:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Los Angeles Personal Injury Lawyer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Category]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[product liability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drug safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FDA testing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[laws]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.psblaw.com/?p=5744</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A seeming inability of the Food and Drug Administration to properly police pharmaceutical factories in other countries has led some lawmakers to offer up a solution. A Pennsylvanian Congressman has put forth a bill that would provide critical funding to allow the FDA to conduct more inspections in drug factories abroad.  The bill, known as [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A seeming inability of the Food and Drug Administration to properly police pharmaceutical factories in other countries has led some lawmakers to offer up a solution.</p>
<p>A Pennsylvanian Congressman has <a href="http://www.essentialpublicradio.org/story/2012-05-14/bill-would-fund-fdas-foreign-inspections-through-domestic-fee-11111" target="_blank">put forth a bill</a> that would provide critical funding to allow the FDA to conduct more inspections in drug factories abroad.  The bill, known as H.R. 3988, would accomplish this by placing a fee on United States-based makers of generic drugs.  The Congressman said that drug makers are behind him on the plan, so long as it means that inspections can be carried out and drugs can make their way onto shelves quicker.</p>
<p>To that end, the bill also aims to speed through the long line of generic drugs currently trying to get approved by the FDA.  It does this by putting money toward the backlog.  If passed, the proponent of the bill thinks that the 30 month approval process could be made more expedient.</p>
<p>The Congressman touting the bill referred to the recent contaminated heparin situation making headlines as the type of thing that could be prevented if the FDA were given more foreign inspection power.  According to him, just shy of $300 million would go to the FDA by instituting the new fee on domestic generic drug producers.</p>
<p>The House Energy and Commerce Committee passed the bill last week.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/15/congress-considers-bill-that-extends-fdas-foreign-inspection-power/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ohio Legislature Bans Texting While Driving Throughout State</title>
		<link>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/15/ohio-legislature-bans-texting-while-driving-throughout-state/</link>
		<comments>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/15/ohio-legislature-bans-texting-while-driving-throughout-state/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 21:43:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Los Angeles Personal Injury Lawyer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Distracted Driving]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News Category]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cell phone laws]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[distracted driving]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[teenage driving]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.psblaw.com/?p=5742</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[An Ohio bill designed to curb the practice of texting while driving has just cleared one more hurdle. The State Legislature voted today by a 82-12 margin to approve a ban of texting while driving throughout the entire state of Ohio.  Any violations of this law would be considered a misdemeanor, and fines could reach [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>An Ohio bill designed to curb the practice of texting while driving has just cleared one more hurdle.</p>
<p>The State Legislature <a href="http://chronicle.northcoastnow.com/2012/05/15/ohio-lawmakers-advance-bill-to-ban-texting-teen-cell-phone-use-while-driving/" target="_blank">voted today</a> by a 82-12 margin to approve a ban of texting while driving throughout the entire state of Ohio.  Any violations of this law would be considered a misdemeanor, and fines could reach as high as $150.  However, if a city has a stricter law or steeper penalty for those persons who use their cellphone while driving, the local measure takes precedence.</p>
<p>If a person driving a vehicle is spotted texting and that person is under the age of 18, then he or she can be pulled over and slapped with a primary offense.  However, it should be noted that, for all other drivers, texting will only be considered a secondary offense.  What this means is that adult drivers can’t be pulled over for texting alone.  They must also be committing some other offense that initiated their having to be pulled over.  Only then can a citation be issued.</p>
<p>Although the legislation is widely supported, some worry that it will be hard for officers to make the distinction between teens and adults.  The Ohio Fraternal Order of Police, for instance, say that they would have liked to see texting become a primary offense.  Still, they support the measure because they think it’s a step in the right direction.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/15/ohio-legislature-bans-texting-while-driving-throughout-state/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CPSC Warns Bicyclists To Look Out For Recalled Products</title>
		<link>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/15/cpsc-warns-bicyclists-to-look-out-for-recalled-products/</link>
		<comments>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/15/cpsc-warns-bicyclists-to-look-out-for-recalled-products/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 21:36:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Los Angeles Personal Injury Lawyer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News Category]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[product recall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bicycle safety]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CPSC]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.psblaw.com/?p=5740</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It’s spring, and that means that numerous people from across the country are about to head out or have already headed out on their bicycles for scenic rides.  That’s why the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission is advising everyone to check to make sure that their bike or bike accessories have not been recalled [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It’s spring, and that means that numerous people from across the country are about to head out or have already headed out on their bicycles for scenic rides.  That’s why the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission is <a href="http://www.cpsc.gov/cpscpub/prerel/prhtml12/12177.html" target="_blank">advising everyone</a> to check to make sure that their bike or bike accessories have not been recalled due to an inherent safety defect.</p>
<p>To start with, the organization offers up five bicycles that have had to be recalled because of a fall hazard that each of the bikes pose.  These bikes include Fuji Saratoga Women’s Bicycles, 2010 to 2012 Public Bikes Bicycles, 2012 Trek FX and District Bicycles, Bridgeway Bicycles, and 2012 bicycles made by Specialized Bicycle Components that have Advanced Group Carbon Forks.  These units have been recalled for a variety of reasons, from chains, frames, and bolts breaking to pedal cracking and brake disengagement.</p>
<p>The CPSC also wants consumers to be aware of various accessories that could also be potentially hazardous.  The Topeak Babyseat II Bicycle Carrier Seat could amputate a child’s finger if he or she sticks their fingers into a hinge mechanism.  A Chariot bicycle trailer and trailer conversion kit have defects that cause the items to disengage from the bike while in use.  And Little Tricky Bicycle Helmets fail to comply with impact resistance standards.</p>
<p>The list goes on, and concerned consumers should visit the website for more details.  All persons who find that they have a recalled bike product in their possession should contact the maker of the item to figure out the proper steps to take.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/15/cpsc-warns-bicyclists-to-look-out-for-recalled-products/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Undeclared Milk Prompts Recall of Cafe Tasse Belgian Chocolate Bar</title>
		<link>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/15/undeclared-milk-prompts-recall-of-cafe-tasse-belgian-chocolate-bar/</link>
		<comments>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/15/undeclared-milk-prompts-recall-of-cafe-tasse-belgian-chocolate-bar/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 21:10:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Foodborne Illness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News Category]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[product recall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[food recall]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[undeclared allergen]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.psblaw.com/?p=5713</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Cafe Tasse S.A. is recalling its Noir Belgian Chocolate Bar. The 1.58 ounce Cafe Tasse brand chocolate bar contains milk, but it does not say as much on the label. The candy was sold at retail locations in Virginia, Washington, Massachusetts, and California from January to April of this year.  The items have an expiration date [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cafe Tasse S.A. <a href="http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ucm302056.htm" target="_blank">is recalling</a> its Noir Belgian Chocolate Bar. The 1.58 ounce Cafe Tasse brand chocolate bar contains milk, but it does not say as much on the label. The candy was sold at retail locations in Virginia, Washington, Massachusetts, and California from January to April of this year.  The items have an expiration date of September 15 of next year.  Consumers are being advised to be on the lookout for lot code L113033249 and a bar code of 54000219 505504.  The candy bar comes in a gold foil package wrapped in black paper.</p>
<p>For people with allergies to milk, the product poses a threat of causing severe reactions.  No incidents of this nature have been reported at this time, and the seven retailers and single distributor of the chocolate bars have been informed of what&#8217;s going on.  11 cases in total were found to be compromised.</p>
<p>Cafe Tasse discovered the defect in Belgium, but many of the candy bars had already been imported into the United States by the Wellesley, Massachusetts-based Belgium&#8217;s Chocolate Source.  All the inventory that was found to be improperly packaged has since been destroyed by the company.</p>
<p>Customers can return the chocolate bars to the store for a full refund. They are also being advised to get in contact with the importer, as opposed to the distributor, should they have any questions or concerns.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.psblaw.com/2012/05/15/undeclared-milk-prompts-recall-of-cafe-tasse-belgian-chocolate-bar/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

