The Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit held that the U.S. Consumer Products Safety Commission scrutiny of the product in question was properly admitted in evidence. In Cummins v. Bic U.S.A., Inc., 727 f.3D 506 (6TH Cir. 2013), a 3-year old boy was severely burned while handling a Bic lighter. The plaintiff filed a motion in limine to prevent the defendant from offering evidence concerning the CPSC’s investigation of the lighter and its subsequent determination that it did not present a hazard. Plaintiff relied upon 15 U.S.C. Section 2074(b) which provides:
The failure of the Consumer Products Safety Commission to take any action or commence a proceeding with respect to the safety of a consumer product shall not be admissible in evidence and litigation at common law or under state statutory law relating to such consumer product.
The Court of Appeals agreed with the trial court that Section 207(b) only barred evidence that the CPSC had completely failed to act as opposed to those instances, such as in this case, where the CPSC engaged in an activity that ultimately led to a decision not to regulate. The Court pointed out that the evidence would not be conclusive of liability but would be relevant to that determination.