15 U.S.C. § 2071

Injunctive enforcement and seizure

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 15 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) JurisdictionThe United States district courts shall have jurisdiction to take the following action:(1) Restrain any violation of section 2068 of this title.(2) Restrain any person from manufacturing for sale, offering for sale, distributing in commerce, or importing into the United States a product in violation of an order in effect under section 2064(d) of this title.(3) Restrain any person from distributing in commerce a product which does not comply with a consumer product safety rule.Such actions may be brought by the Commission (without regard to section 2076(b)(7)(A) of this title) or by the Attorney General in any United States district court for a district wherein any act, omission, or transaction constituting the violation occurred, or in such court for the district wherein the defendant is found or transacts business. In any action under this section process may be served on a defendant in any other district in which the defendant resides or may be found.(b) Products liable to proceedingAny consumer product—(1) which fails to conform with an applicable consumer product safety rule, or(2) the manufacture for sale, offering for sale, distribution in commerce, or the importation into the United States of which has been prohibited by an order in effect under section 2064(d) of this title,when introduced into or while in commerce or while held for sale after shipment in commerce shall be liable to be proceeded against on libel of information and condemned in any district court of the United States within the jurisdiction of which such consumer product is found. Proceedings in cases instituted under the authority of this subsection shall conform as nearly as possible to proceedings in rem in admiralty. Whenever such proceedings involving substantially similar consumer products are pending in courts of two or more judicial districts they shall be consolidated for trial by order of any such court upon application reasonably made by any party in interest upon notice to all other parties in interest.(Pub. L. 92–573, § 22, Oct. 27, 1972, 86 Stat. 1225; Pub. L. 94–284, §§ 11(b), 12(c), May 11, 1976, 90 Stat. 507, 508.)Editorial NotesAmendments

1976—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 94–284, §§ 11(b), 12(c)(1), designated existing provision as par. (1) and (3), added par. (2), and in provision following par. (3) substituted “(without regard to section 2076(b)(7)(A) of this title)” for “(with the concurrence of the Attorney General)”.

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 94–284, § 12(c)(2), amended subsec. (b) generally, inserting provision designated as par. (2) which included within consumer products liable to proceedings, a product of which the manufacture for sale, offering for sale, distribution in commerce, or importation into the United States has been prohibited.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date

Section effective on the sixtieth day following Oct. 27, 1972, see section 34 of Pub. L. 92–573, set out as a note under section 2051 of this title.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 10 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1980–2024 · leading case: United States v. Spectrum Brands, Inc., 924 F.3d 337 (7th Cir. 2019).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

United States v. Spectrum Brands, Inc., 924 F.3d 337 (7th Cir. 2019). · cites it 2× “15 U.S.C. § 2071 (a)(1). The government sought both forms of relief in its complaint against Spectrum.”

United States v. Spectrum Brands, Inc., 218 F. Supp. 3d 794 (W.D. Wis. 2016). · cites it 3× “15 U.S.C. § 2071 (a)(1). The government seeks summary judgment on its claims that Spectrum violated the CPSA by failing to report the defective carafe handles sooner.”

United States v. Zen Magnets, LLC, 170 F. Supp. 3d 1365 (D. Colo. 2016). · cites it 4× “In order for this Court to issue permanent injunctive relief pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 2071 (a)(1), 4 the CPSC must demonstrate there are no genuine issues of material fact as to Defendants’ violation of Section 2068.”

Plaskolite, Inc. v. Baxt Indus., Inc., 486 F. Supp. 213 (N.D. Ga. 1980). · cites it 2× “15 U.S.C. § 2071 (1979 Supp.). 5 . Plaintiff’s prayer for the imposition of a statutory penalty is disposed of on p.”

In the Matter of Establishment Inspection of Skil Corp.. Appeal of Skil Corp., 846 F.2d 1127 (7th Cir. 1988). “And section 22(a)(1), 15 U.S.C. § 2071 (a)(1), which again has no counterpart in the OSHA statute, authorizes the federal district courts to restrain any prohibited act.”

United States v. One Hazardous Prod. Consisting of a Refuse Bin, 487 F. Supp. 581 (D.N.J. 1980). · cites it 2× “The complaints sought seizure and forfeiture of the refuse bins under § 22(b) of the Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2071 (b). 5 The re *584 maining two actions against the refuse bins owned by Metro were instituted on January 15, 1979 and were identical in all material respects to the actions…”

United States v. Zen Magnets, LLC, 104 F. Supp. 3d 1277 (D. Colo. 2015). “Court may issue a preliminary injunction to “restrain the distribution in commerce” of particular products, and 15 U.S.C. § 2071 (a)(1) states that the Court has jurisdiction to “restrain any *1284 violation of section 2068 of this title.”

United States v. Spectrum Brands, Inc. (7th Cir. 2019). · cites it 2× “15 U.S.C. § 2071 (a)(1). The government sought both forms of relief in its complaint against Spectrum.”

United States v. SunSetter Prods. LP (D. Mass. 2024). · cites it 2× “§ 2064 (b)(4)” (Count II); and (3) seeking injunctive relief pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 2071 (a)(1) based on Defendant’s failure to “implement[] and maintain[] a reasonable and effective program or system for compliance,” following its “repeated, years-long failures to furnish…”

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.