Vinocur v. Pomona Quality Foam, Inc.

Posted: 12/07/2015  browse the case archive

Citizen enforcer Laurence Vinocur’s allegations against defendant Pomona Quality Foam, Inc. (“Pomona”) were resolved on December 7, 2015, when the parties entered into an a Consent Judgment.  In this matter, Vinocur alleged that Pomona sold foam used as padding in upholstered furniture containing the flame retardant tris(1,3-dichloro-2-propyl) phosphate (“TDCPP”) in the State of California without providing the requisite health hazard warnings.

As part of the settlement, Pomona agreed not to sell any foam in California after the Alameda County Superior Court approves the Judgment, unless the foam contains no detectable amount of TDCPP when analyzed using state or federally approved testing methodologies.  Foam currently existing in Pomona’s inventory must be sold with Proposition 65 warnings provided.  Pomona has also agreed to provide Proposition 65 warnings to each of its retailers and distributors that may have received foam containing TDCPP within the last twelve months.  Additionally, Vinocur has agreed to waive a portion of the civil fine should Pomona extend the breadth of reformulation to include tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate (“TDBPP”) and tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate (“TCEP”) in addition to TDCPP.

The Consent Judgment requires settlement payments of $13,000, divided therein between civil penalties, 75% of which are paid to California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, and compensation to whistleblower Vinocur and his counsel for their successful enforcement of this matter in the public interest.  

Download PDF

It appears your Web browser is not configured to display PDF files. No worries, just click here to download the PDF file.