C.F.R. » Title 16 » CHAPTER II—CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION › SUBCHAPTER B—CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY ACT REGULATIONS › PART 1210—SAFETY STANDARD FOR CIGARETTE LIGHTERS › Subpart A—Requirements for Child Resistance

16 C.F.R. § 1210.1

Scope, application, and effective date

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

This part 1210, a consumer product safety standard, prescribes requirements for disposable and novelty lighters. These requirements are intended to make the lighters subject to the standard's provisions resistant to successful operation by children younger than 5 years of age. This standard applies to all disposable and novelty lighters, as defined in § 1210.2, that are manufactured or imported after July 12, 1994.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases, 1999–2011 · leading case: Phillips v. Cricket Lighters, 841 A.2d 1000 (Pa. 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Phillips v. Cricket Lighters, 841 A.2d 1000 (Pa. 2003). · cites it 4× “3 , the lighter involved in the instant fire was manufactured before the July 12, 1994 effective date of the regulations, 16 C.F.R. § 1210.1 . [1] Consequently, there are no regulations that create a duty to make the lighter safe for the use of the child in this case.”
Phillips v. Cricket Lighters, 883 A.2d 439 (Pa. 2005). · cites it 2× “3 , the lighter involved in the instant fire was manufactured before the July 12, 1994 effective date of the regulations, 16 C.F.R. § 1210.1 . Consequently, there are no regulations that create a duty to make the lighter safe for the use of the child in this case.”
Bic Pen Corp. v. Carter, 171 S.W.3d 657 (Tex. App. 2005). · cites it 4× “The standards are set forth in 16 C.F.R. § 1210.1 -.5 (1993) and are outlined, in relevant part, in the footnote below.”
Phillips Ex Rel. Williams v. Cricket Lighters, 773 A.2d 802 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2001). · cites it 3× “16 C.F.R. §§ 1210.1 et seq. ¶ 6 Appellees suggest that this action is preempted for the following reason: If this suit is permitted to go forward, there would be an actual conflict with the federal objectives embodied in 16 C.”
Hernandez Ex Rel. Emeterio v. Tokai Corp., 2 S.W.3d 251 (Tex. 1999). “16 C.F.R. § 1210.1 (1999). See also Safety Standard for Cigarette Lighters, 58 Fed.”
BIC Pen Corp. v. Carter Ex Rel. Carter, 346 S.W.3d 533 (Tex. 2011). “3d at 508 ; 16 C.F.R. § 1210.1 . The CPSC does not impose design requirements on manufacturers.”
Colon Ex Rel. Molina v. Bic USA, Inc., 136 F. Supp. 2d 196 (S.D.N.Y. 2000). · cites it 2× “This standard is set forth in 16 C.F.R. § 1210.1 et seq. 3. Express Preemption A claim may be expressly preempted by the language of a statute.”
Frith v. Bic Corp., 863 So. 2d 960 (Miss. 2004). · cites it 2× “16 C.F.R. § 1210.1 -1210.20. 16 C.F.R. § 1210.”
Bic Pen Corp. v. Carter, 346 S.W.3d 569 (Tex. App. 2008). “16 C.F.R. § 1210.1 . The regulations are intended to make lighters resistant to successful operation by children younger than five years of age.”
Frith v. Bic Corp., 852 So. 2d 592 (Miss. Ct. App. 2002). “16 C.F.R. § 1210.1 . The standard proposed by the Friths is a higher standard than that established by federal law.”
Billy Wayne Frith v. BIC Corp. (Miss. 2000). · cites it 2× “16 C.F.R. § 1210.1 . These requirements are intended to make the lighters subject to the standard's provisions resistant to successful operation by children younger than five years of age.”
Billy Wayne Frith v. BIC Corp. (Miss. 2000). · cites it 2× “16 C.F.R. §§ 1210.1 - 1210.20. 16 C.F.R. § 1210.”
Show all 14 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.