Scope Infection Lawsuit Patients across the United States have filed medical scope infection lawsuits after contaminated endoscopes and duodenoscopes allegedly transmitted dangerous bacterial infections during procedures such as ERCP, colonoscopy, and other endoscopic treatments.
Spinal Cord Stimulator Lawsuit Spinal cord stimulator lawsuits allege that implanted pain devices malfunctioned, migrated, or caused nerve damage, often forcing patients to undergo revision or removal surgery.
Depo-Provera Lawsuit Depo-Provera lawsuits are being investigated for women who developed meningioma brain tumors after receiving Depo-Provera birth control shots, claiming that Pfizer failed to adequately disclose side effects.
Suboxone Tooth Decay Lawsuit Lawsuits are being pursued by users of Suboxone who experienced tooth loss, broken teeth or required dental extractions. Settlement benefits may be available.
Ozempic Lawsuit Lawyers are pursuing Ozempic lawsuits, Wegovy lawsuits and Mounjaro lawsuits over gastroparesis or stomach paralysis, which can leave users with long-term gastrointestinal side effects
Hair Relaxer Lawsuit Regular exposure to chemicals in hair relaxer may cause uterine cancer, ovarian cancer and other injuries. Women diagnosed with cancer may be eligible for settlement benefits.
Nitrous Oxide Lawsuit Individuals who suffered harm, or families who lost a loved one after using nitrous oxide products may be eligible for financial compensation through a nitrous oxide lawsuit.
Breast Mesh Lawsuit Lawyers are investigating breast mesh lawsuits for women who suffered infections, pain, or implant failure from internal bra implants used in breast reconstruction surgery.
Bard PowerPort Lawsuit Serious and life-threatening injuries have been linked to problems with Bard PowerPort. Lawsuits are now being pursued by individuals who suffered injuries from the implantable port catheter fracturing or migrating.
Sports Betting Addiction Lawsuit Sports betting addiction lawsuits are being investigated for college students and young adults who developed gambling problems after using apps like FanDuel and DraftKings, alleging that the platforms failed to warn about the addictive nature of their features and marketing practices.
EPA Unveils Strategy For Commercial Chemical Evaluations January 18, 2017 Russell Maas Add Your CommentsFederal environmental safety officials have announced three new rules that are designed to form the backbone of a strategy that will evaluate and regulate new chemicals, to help determine potential risks to the public health and environment.ย The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced the proposed rules on January 13, which would establish the first-ever, comprehensive regulatory strategy for chemicals entering U.S. commerce.The three new rules follow the passing of The Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act, which was signed into law by President Barack Obama on June 22, 2016, as the first update to the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) since it was originally enacted in 1976.Do You Know about…Spinal Cord Stimulator lawsuitsSpinal cord stimulator lawsuits are being investigated for individuals who suffered unnecessary shocks, burns or other problems, often resulting in the need for additional surgery to remove the SCS.Learn MoreSEE IF YOU QUALIFY FOR COMPENSATIONDo You Know AboutโฆSpinal Cord Stimulator lawsuitsSpinal cord stimulator lawsuits are being investigated for individuals who suffered unnecessary shocks, burns or other problems, often resulting in the need for additional surgery to remove the SCS.Learn MoreSEE IF YOU QUALIFY FOR COMPENSATIONIn addition to the new “foundational” rules, the EPA has also proposed three rules restricting specific high risk uses of a number of chemicals. The rules must be finalized by June 2017, according to mandates set in the new chemical law.Oversight and regulation has become a necessity for chemicals entering U.S. commerce, given the new technology and scientific developments that prove certain popular household chemicals used heavily over the last forty years may actually be harmful and cause diseases from overexposure, experts say.The EPA indicates that the proposed rules will set into motion a process designed to quickly evaluate chemicals that have been entered into commerce over the last decade, by granting them the authority to identify chemicals made in, imported into or processed within the U.S. The EPA will decide which of those have potential health and environmental risks through the use of scientific data and assess those risks and pursue regulatory controls as needed.As part of the new rules, the EPA will be required to systemically prioritize existing chemical substances that have entered the market within the past 10 years. The new process will be managed by the EPAโs Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention and Office of General Counsel.The American Chemistry Council released a statement praising the EPA for their fast development and implementation of the new chemical evaluation rules. Since Congress last amended the TSCA when it was enacted into law in 1976, tens of thousands of chemicals were automatically grandfathered into production as presumable safe materials without any federal or scientific evaluation to assess their risk to human or environmental risks.According to prior research by the EPA, of the 85,000 known chemicals, about 1,000 are used in everyday consumer products and are in need of safety reevaluation. The EPA placed 90 chemicals known to pose health risks on a list called the TSCA Work Plan and intends to place those chemicals high on its prioritization list.Included in the EPAโs new rules, the agency has set specific agendas for certain chemicals, particularly for paint and coating removal uses of two solvents, methylene chloride and n-methylpyrrolide, dry cleaning and aerosol degreasing uses of other solvents including trichloroethylene, and the vapor degreasing uses of trichloethylene.In December, the EPA announced ten chemicals it was making a priority to review, including asbestos and dioxane.When a chemical is deemed to pose an unreasonable risk the EPA must take action within two years, with the possibility of an extension to four years. Bans and phaseouts have to occur within five years of an assessment that a chemical is unreasonably dangerous.For new chemicals, the EPA must review and declare that a chemical is safe before it is allowed on the marketplace and can ban, require additional testing, or place limitations on new chemicals and their uses.Much of the funding will come from chemical manufacturer user fees. When a manufacturer wants their chemical tested, they must pay 50% of the cost if itโs already on the EPAโs agenda, or 100% if the EPA has not yet scheduled a review. They will pay fees for submitting test data, for notices of new chemicals, and other activities. Written by: Russell MaasManaging Editor & Senior Legal JournalistRussell Maas is a paralegal and the Managing Editor of AboutLawsuits.com, where he has reported on mass tort litigation, medical recalls, and consumer safety issues since 2010. He brings legal experience from one of the nationโs leading personal injury law firms and oversees the siteโs editorial strategy, including SEO and content development. Tags: Asbestos, Chemicals, Congress, Dioxane, EPAMore Lawsuit Stories Abbott Spinal Cord Stimulator Battery Problems Led to Repeat Surgeries, Lawsuit Claims June 16, 2026 Wegovy Vision Side Effects Resulted in Blindness in Left Eye, Lawsuit Alleges June 16, 2026 EnfaCare Preterm Infant NEC Lawsuit Alleges Formula Caused Life-Threatening Diagnosis June 16, 2026 0 Comments NameThis field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.Share Your CommentsFirst Name*Last NameEmail* Shared Comments*This field is hidden when viewing the formI authorize the above comments be posted on this page Yes NoPost Comment I authorize the above comments be posted on this pageWeekly Digest Opt-In Yes, send me a weekly email with the latest lawsuits, recalls and warnings.Want your comments reviewed by a lawyer?To have an attorney review your comments and contact you about a potential case, provide your contact information below. This will not be published.Contact Phone #Alt Phone #Private CommentsNOTE: Providing information for review by an attorney does not form an attorney-client relationship.CAPTCHAGA SourceGA CampaignGA MediumGA ContentGA TermΔ MORE TOP STORIES Abbott Spinal Cord Stimulator Battery Problems Led to Repeat Surgeries, Lawsuit Claims (Posted: yesterday)Four plaintiffs allege Abbott spinal cord stimulator battery problems, painful malfunctions and other device failures caused worsening symptoms and repeat surgeries after the company made hundreds of changes to its implant systems.MORE ABOUT: SPINAL CORD STIMULATOR LAWSUITLawsuit Alleges Spinal Cord Stimulator Shocks, Burns Caused by Manufacturing Defect (06/12/2026)Boston Scientific Stimulator Lawsuits Centralized in Federal MDL (06/08/2026)Lawsuit Indicates Spinal Cord Stimulator Lead Complications Resulted in Shocks, Removal Surgery (06/02/2026) Depo-Provera Lawsuit Settlement Agreement May Resolve Eligible Meningioma Claims in MDL (Posted: 2 days ago)A tentative Depo-Provera lawsuit settlement has been announced, vacating the start of the first bellwether trial while details are finalized.MORE ABOUT: DEPO-PROVERA LAWSUITDepo-Provera Meningioma Side Effects Left Woman With Debilitating Migraines, Lawsuit Claims (06/05/2026)Depo-Provera Caused Meningioma 29 Years After First Birth Control Shots: Lawsuit (05/22/2026)Depo-Provera Lawsuit Filings Exceed 6,000, As Court Prepares for First Test Trials (05/18/2026) Suboxone Dental Erosion Lawsuit Alleges Indivior Should Have Known About Tooth Decay Risks (Posted: 6 days ago)A Suboxone dental erosion lawsuit filed by nine plaintiffs accuses the manufacturer of knowing the film strips caused severe tooth decay and other oral health problems, but failed to warn the medical community or patients.MORE ABOUT: SUBOXONE TOOTH DECAY LAWSUITSuboxone Oral Film Lawsuit Claims Opioid Treatment Causes Tooth Decay (05/20/2026)Lawsuit Alleges Suboxone Dental Damage Warnings Were Issued Too Late (05/07/2026)Study Finds No Birth Defect Risks From Suboxone When Compared to Methadone (04/30/2026)
Abbott Spinal Cord Stimulator Battery Problems Led to Repeat Surgeries, Lawsuit Claims (Posted: yesterday)Four plaintiffs allege Abbott spinal cord stimulator battery problems, painful malfunctions and other device failures caused worsening symptoms and repeat surgeries after the company made hundreds of changes to its implant systems.MORE ABOUT: SPINAL CORD STIMULATOR LAWSUITLawsuit Alleges Spinal Cord Stimulator Shocks, Burns Caused by Manufacturing Defect (06/12/2026)Boston Scientific Stimulator Lawsuits Centralized in Federal MDL (06/08/2026)Lawsuit Indicates Spinal Cord Stimulator Lead Complications Resulted in Shocks, Removal Surgery (06/02/2026)
Depo-Provera Lawsuit Settlement Agreement May Resolve Eligible Meningioma Claims in MDL (Posted: 2 days ago)A tentative Depo-Provera lawsuit settlement has been announced, vacating the start of the first bellwether trial while details are finalized.MORE ABOUT: DEPO-PROVERA LAWSUITDepo-Provera Meningioma Side Effects Left Woman With Debilitating Migraines, Lawsuit Claims (06/05/2026)Depo-Provera Caused Meningioma 29 Years After First Birth Control Shots: Lawsuit (05/22/2026)Depo-Provera Lawsuit Filings Exceed 6,000, As Court Prepares for First Test Trials (05/18/2026)
Suboxone Dental Erosion Lawsuit Alleges Indivior Should Have Known About Tooth Decay Risks (Posted: 6 days ago)A Suboxone dental erosion lawsuit filed by nine plaintiffs accuses the manufacturer of knowing the film strips caused severe tooth decay and other oral health problems, but failed to warn the medical community or patients.MORE ABOUT: SUBOXONE TOOTH DECAY LAWSUITSuboxone Oral Film Lawsuit Claims Opioid Treatment Causes Tooth Decay (05/20/2026)Lawsuit Alleges Suboxone Dental Damage Warnings Were Issued Too Late (05/07/2026)Study Finds No Birth Defect Risks From Suboxone When Compared to Methadone (04/30/2026)