Defective Motorcycle Gear & Product Liability Laws In California

Many times, product liability lawsuits can arise out of a motorcycle accident. Manufacturers and sellers can be held liable for personal injury-related expenses, such as medical expenses, when a motorcyclist's injuries are caused by or even worsened by defective motorcycle product and motorcycle protective gear. "A manufacturer, distributor, or retailer is liable in tort if a defect in the manufacture or design of its product causes injury while the product is being used in a reasonably foreseeable way." (Soule v. GM Corp. (1994) 8 Cal.4th 548, 560 [34 Cal.Rptr.2d 607, 882 P.2d 298], internal citations omitted.) Often, motorcycle protective gear or motorcycle products can cause a motorcycle accident to occur or exacerbate injuries sustain due to motorcycle accident, such as faulty motorcycle tires, a defective motorcycle helmet, or a defective motorcycle jacket. Other motorcycle products can exacerbate a motorcyclist's injuries in the event of an accident, such as a defective motorcycle helmet or motorcycle jacket.

How Can A Product Be Defective?

One way motorcycle products and motorcycle gear may be considered defective, is if the manufacturer that produces motorcycle products and gear fails to warn the consumer of a known risk in using their product, and/or fails to provide the consumer a warning label on the product.

California Products Liability Lawsuits and Strict Liability

Under state law, lawsuits involving product liability in California are considered as "strict liability". Strict liability means that a Plaintiff does not have to show negligence on the part of the manufacturer or anyone in the chain of distribution to recover money damages due to the defective product. However, the Plaintiff must meet your burden of proof in order to recover monies for injuries sustained. A experienced Glendale motorcycle product liability attorney can help you recover money damages for personal injury sustained due to a defective motorcycle product, such as motorcycle helmet, motorcycle tires, motorcycle protective gear. "Strict liability has been invoked for three types of defects - manufacturing defects, design defects, and "warning defects" i.e., inadequate warnings or failures to warn." (Anderson v. Owens- Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1991) 53 Cal.3d 987, 995 [281 Cal.Rptr. 528, 810 P.2d 549].) "A manufacturer is strictly liable in tort when an article he places on the market, knowing that it is to be used without inspection for defects, proves to have a defect that causes injury to a human being... The purpose of such liability is to insure that the costs of injuries resulting from defective products are borne by the manufacturers that put such products on the market rather than by the injured persons who are powerless to protect themselves." (Greenman v. Yuba Power Products, Inc. (1963) 59 Cal.2d 57, 62 - 63 [27 Cal.Rptr. 697, 377 P.2d 897].)

What is The Strict Liability Doctrine?

"[T]he doctrine of strict liability may not be restricted on a theory of privity of contract. Since the doctrine applies even where the manufacturer has attempted to limit liability, they further make it clear that the doctrine may not be limited on the theory that no representation of safety is made to the bystander. If anything, bystanders should be entitled to greater protection than the consumer or user where injury to bystanders from the defect is reasonably foreseeable. Consumers and users, at least, have the opportunity to inspect for defects and to limit their purchases to articles manufactured by reputable manufacturers and sold by reputable retailers, whereas the bystander ordinarily has no such opportunities. In short, the bystander is in greater need of protection from defective products which are dangerous, and if any distinction should be made between bystanders and users, it should be made, contrary to the position of defendants, to extend greater liability in favor of the bystanders. (Elmore v. American Motors Corp. (1969) 70 Cal.2d 578, 586 [75 Cal.Rptr. 652, 451 P.2d 84].)

What Do You Need In Product Liability Lawsuits In California?

In most, if not all motorcycle products liability cases, in order to not only strengthen your case, but prove your case, an expert witness testimony is required to prove that there was a manufacturing or design defect in a product.

California Civil Jury Instructions (CACI) Series 1200 – Products Liability

In California civil lawsuits, jurors are given jury instructions in order to help them determine whether the Defendant(s) should be held liable for injuries caused to the Plaintiff(s). A list of jury instructions can be found on the CACI Series 1200 Products Liability Section.

Personal Injury Consultation. No Recovery, No Fee.

Give us a call, and speak to a experienced motorcycle accident attorney and motorcycle product liability attorney in Glendale, Los Angeles County, CA. Our attorneys speak English, Spanish, Armenian, Russian, Ukrainian, French, and Italian.

Some common motorcycle accident related questions riders have are regarding how insurance adjusters determine liability or fault, recovering monies for injuries suffered, traffic laws, as well as, helmet laws. The following are some of those common questions.

Q: I was involved in an t-bone traffic collision while riding my motorcycle because a car made a left turn in front of me. Who is at fault?

A: Generally, the party that is making the left turn is almost always at fault for a collision when failing to allow all vehicles to pass from the opposite direction before making the left turn. Under California Vehicle Code § 21801: (a) The driver of a vehicle intending to turn to the left or to complete a U-turn upon a highway, or to turn left into public or private property, or an alley, shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles approaching from the opposite direction which are close enough to constitute a hazard at any time during the turning movement, and shall continue to yield the right-of-way to the approaching vehicles until the left turn or U-turn can be made with reasonable safety. (b) A driver having yielded as prescribed in subdivision (a), and having given a signal when and as required by this code, may turn left or complete a U-turn, and the drivers of vehicles approaching the intersection or the entrance to the property or alley from the opposite direction shall yield the right-of-way to the turning vehicle.

Q: I was involved in an accident while riding my motorcycle, what should I do?

A: It is always important to document as much material as you can, i.e take photos and videos of damage to your motorcycle and the other vehicle, your gear, helmet, and any physically visible injuries. Keep copies of any and all medical records, bills, and any related expenses. If you are unable to immediately meet with an attorney, it is important that you do not admit any fault or sign anything (i.e. any forms from an insurer) in order to preserve your rights.

Q: I was involved in an accident while riding my motorcycle, but wasn't wearing a helmet. Can I still recover monies from the at fault party?

A: Under California law, all riders must wear motorcycle helmets, no matter the age. If you sustain a head or brain injury following a motorcycle accident and you were NOT wearing a helmet, it will be very difficult to recover damages for your head injury due to the California helmet law, which automatically establishes comparative negligence. If you sustained other injuries, such as, broken rib, broken bone, back or shoulder injury you may still be able to recover for other injuries, however an issue that arises and also relevant as to the amount of damages you will recover, if it is shown that your failure to wear a helmet contributed to your injuries.

Q: How can I check if my motorcycle helmet is acceptable under my state's helmet law?

A: Check your helmet to find a label that reads "DOT", which stands for Department of Transportation and is the manufacturer's certification that the helmet conforms to federal safety standards. If you were involved in a motorcycle accident, call now for a consultation and speak with a motorcycle accident attorney. Our attorneys speak English, Spanish, Armenian, Russian, Ukrainian, French, and Italian. KAASS Law is authorized to practice law in California. The above content is intended for California residents only. This content provides only general information which may or may not reflect current legal developments. KAASS Law expressly disclaims all liability in respect to actions taken or not taken based on any of the contents of this website. The above content DOES NOT create an attorney-client relationship. KAASS Law does not represent you unless you have expressly retained KAASS Law in person at the KAASS Law office. KAASS Law helps clients in: Los Angeles, Burbank, Hollywood, Glendale, Van Nuys, North Hollywood, Studio City, Highland Park, Eagle Rock, Sunland, Tujunga, Sylmar, La Crescenta, La Canada, Beverly Hills, Westwood, Santa Monica, Brentwood. Pacoima, Montebello, Commerce, Alhambra, Downey, Bell, Maywood, Walnut Park, Vernon, Lynwood, Echo Park, Silverlake, Mission Hills, Northridge, Woodland Hills, Encino, Canoga Park, North Hills, Porter Ranch, Chatsworth, Reseda.

Major proposed key changes for Assembly Bill 729, marijuana licensee in California should know about! Accordingly, the bill allows its licensee or employees to "refuse to sell marijuana to a person who is unable to produce adequate personal identification showing that he or she is 21 years of age or older and to seize any personal identification presented by a person that shows the person to be under 21 years of age or that is false", as specified.

Can I Sell Marijuana Products in Vending Machines?

No. Assembly Bill 729, prohibits the sale, offer for sale, or distribution of marijuana or marijuana products in a vending machine or appliance, or any other coin- or token-operated mechanical device designed or used for vending purposes.

What Signs Are Marijuana Licensees Required to Post at the Business Location?

Assembly Bill 729 require a licensee to post a sign, visible from each public entrance, and a similar sign inside the premises that reads "No Person Under 21 Allowed" and would authorize a licensee that is also a licensed dispensary to include language on the sign that reads "without identification authorizing the purchase of medical cannabis" In other words, if you are an licensed dispensary and an authorized licensee, than you must also include language on the sign that reads without identification authorizing the purchase of medical cannabis.

Will a Authorized Marijuana Licensee Be Subject to Inspections?

• Conducted during standard business hours of the licensed facility or
• At any other reasonable time.

Are There Limits to Inspections in a Business Which Offer Medical Marijuana and Non-medical Marijuana or Non-medical Marijuana Products?

Under Assembly Bill 729, would authorize a peace officer, or an employee of a licensing authority or a state or local agency granted limited peace officer status, to enter and conduct inspections, as specified, of any place at which nonmedical marijuana or nonmedical marijuana products are

• Sold;
• Produced; or
• Stored or at any site where evidence of activities involving evasion of nonmedical marijuana or nonmedical marijuana products tax may be discovered.

Are Recreational Marijuana Businesses Restricted as to Where They Can Be Located?

Accordingly, AUMA also prohibits a marijuana licensee from being located within a 600-foot radius of a school providing instruction in kindergarten or any grades 1 to 12, inclusive, day care center, or youth center, as specified, unless a licensing authority or local agency specifies a different radius. The bill also prohibits a licensee from being located within a 600-foot radius of the following

• Playground;
• Hospital;
• Church

However, the exception that a licensing authority or local agency specifies a different radius.

Will Marijuana Licensee Be Subjected to "Random Inspections"?

Yes, bill allows law enforcement to inspect all recreational marijuana businesses, including anywhere they might find evidence of tax evasion. The bill also allows law enforcement to engage in operations involving person under 21 years of age is to be used in random inspections, including having pictures taken prior to inspections to verify appearance and requiring the person under 21 years of age to present a true and correct personal identification if verbally requested. If you have questions regarding marijuana laws or or are seeking to start a recreational marijuana business in California, we invite you to call our office at {meta.phoneFormatted} for a consultation with a Los Angeles marijuana business attorney from KAASS Law at any time.

What Do Helmets Do?

The most significant protective gear while riding a motorcycle is your helmet. Helmets that meet the Department of Transportation (DOT) standard are potentially the most effective way of reducing injury levels while riding a motorcycle. The DOT standards are for motorcycle helmets that usually hold a minimum standard of protection for riders. The most effective motorcycle helmets are the full-face helmets, protecting the face and chin. Helmets that are effective can protect the rider from acquiring a Traumatic Brain Injury, which is often the cause of motorcycle accident death. Helmets reduce the risk of head injury by 69% Research shows that motorcycle helmets absorb the energy from the crash to protect the rider from experiencing the force of the collected injury on their head. Unhelmeted motorcycle riders are known to have more of a significant amount of severity in their injuries than helmeted motorcycle riders.

What are the helmet laws?

Each state has their own helmet law. California has a Universal Helmet Law. Pursuant to California Vehicle Code, Division 12, Chapter 5, Article 7, Section 27803. (a) A driver and any passenger shall wear a safety helmet meeting requirements established pursuant to Section 27802 when riding on a motorcycle, motor-driven cycle, or motorized bicycle. (b) It is unlawful to operate a motorcycle, motor-driven cycle, or motorized bicycle if the driver or any passenger is not wearing a safety helmet as required by subdivision (a). (c) It is unlawful to ride as a passenger on a motorcycle, motor-driven cycles, or motorized bicycle if the driver or any passenger is not wearing a safety helmet as required by subdivision (a). (d) This section applies to persons who are riding on motorcycles, motor-driven cycles, or motorized bicycles operated on the highways. (e) For the purposes of this section, ‘wear a safety helmet' or ‘wearing a safety helmet' means having a safety helmet meeting the requirements of Section 27802 (see :Standards" below) on the person's head that is fastened with the helmet straps and that is of a size that fits the wearing person's head securely without excessive lateral or vertical movement. (f) In enacting this section, it is the intent of the Legislature to ensure that all persons are provided with an additional safety benefit while operating or riding a motorcycle, motor-driven cycle, or motorized bicycle." In the United States, there are two types of motorcycle helmet laws:

• The Universal Helmet Law that requires everyone that is riding a motorcycle, including passengers to wear a helmet.
• The Partial Helmet Law which requires only groups of certain people, such as people who are young, inexperienced, or have low medical coverage to wear helmet.

Research shows that The Universal Helmet Law increased helmet use significantly. The opposite occurs when The Universal Helmet law is not active: helmet use is decreased, alongside with increasing injury and death levels. According to the Insurance Information Institute, the federal government estimates that helmet use while riding a motorcycle can reduces the risk of dying in an accident by 37 percent. Under California Vehicle Code 27803, it is mandatory to wear a helmet as a rider or passenger while riding a motorcycle. It is even illegal for a helmeted rider to ride with an unhelmeted passenger. Wearing a helmet can help protect riders and passengers from excessive damages. Although it is the law in California, it is strongly suggested riders utilize DOT approved helmets. Give us a call, our attorneys speak English, Spanish, Armenian, Russian, Ukrainian, French, and Italian. KAASS Law is authorized to practice law in California. The above content is intended for California residents only. This content provides only general information which may or may not reflect current legal developments. KAASS Law expressly disclaims all liability in respect to actions taken or not taken based on any of the contents of this website. The above content DOES NOT create an attorney-client relationship. KAASS Law does not represent you unless you have expressly retained KAASS Law in person at the KAASS Law office. KAASS Law helps clients in: Los Angeles, Burbank, Hollywood, Glendale, Van Nuys, North Hollywood, Studio City, Highland Park, Eagle Rock, Sunland, Tujunga, Sylmar, La Crescenta, La Canada, Beverly Hills, Westwood, Santa Monica, Brentwood. Pacoima, Montebello, Commerce, Alhambra, Downey, Bell, Maywood, Walnut Park, Vernon, Lynwood, Echo Park, Silverlake, Mission Hills, Northridge, Woodland Hills, Encino, Canoga Park, North Hills, Porter Ranch, Chatsworth, Reseda.

California Class Action Certification Information

What can plaintiffs, in California, do if they have been wronged, but have only suffered a minor loss or do not have the funds necessary to file a claim? For example, if a bank has been wrongfully charging their clients fees for a year, and each client has suffered a loss of about $100, what options do these clients have? It would not be feasible for each client to file a claim against the bank because the costs would likely outweigh their potential award. In this case, the wronged clients have the option of filling a "class action" suit. California Civil Code § 1781 describes class action lawsuits, and the requirements to receive certification. "Any consumer entitled to bring an action under Section 1780 may, if the unlawful method, act, or practice has caused damage to other consumers similarly situated, bring an action on behalf of himself and such other consumers to recover damages or obtain other relief..." California Civil Code § 1781. In order to obtain a class action certification, the court must first find that it would be impracticable for all the members of the wronged class to be brought before them. Second, the issues or facts that are common to the class must be "substantially similar" and must predominate any other issues that affect the individual members of the class. Third, the claims or defenses of the parties representing the class must be typical of the class itself. And lastly, the representing party must fairly and adequately represent the class as a whole. If a class action suit is certified, members of the class must be notified about the suit. Notifying class members about the suit is important because all members of the class will be bound by the judgment, whether it be favorable or not. If a class member wishes to not be bound by the judgment in that particular suit, they must request to be excluded by the dates specified. Class members who have been notified of the suit, and have not requested exclusion, will be notified if the suit is dismissed, settled, or compromised. Give us a call, our attorneys speak English, Spanish, Armenian, Russian, Ukrainian, French, and Italian. KAASS Law is authorized to practice law in California. The above content is intended for California residents only. This content provides only general information which may or may not reflect current legal developments. KAASS Law expressly disclaims all liability in respect to actions taken or not taken based on any of the contents of this website. The above content DOES NOT create an attorney-client relationship. Our lawyers in Glendale, Los Angeles County, California, at KAASS Law do not represent you unless you have expressly retained KAASS Law in person at the KAASS Law office. KAASS Law helps clients in: Los Angeles, Burbank, Hollywood, Glendale, Van Nuys, North Hollywood, Studio City, Highland Park, Eagle Rock, Sunland, Tujunga, Sylmar, La Crescenta, La Canada, Beverly Hills, Westwood, Santa Monica, Brentwood. Pacoima, Montebello, Commerce, Alhambra, Downey, Bell, Maywood, Walnut Park, Vernon, Lynwood, Echo Park, Silverlake, Mission Hills, Northridge, Woodland Hills, Encino, Canoga Park, North Hills, Porter Ranch, Chatsworth, Reseda.

California Insurance Bad Faith Claims

California law allows consumers to bring bad faith tort action against their insurers for breaching the duty of good faith when refusing without proper cause to compensate its insured for a loss cover by the policy. Generally, every insurance policy has an implied obligation of good faith and fair dealing that neither the insurance company nor the insured will do anything to injure the right of the other party to receive the benefits of the agreement.

What does Insurance Bad Faith Mean?

Insurance bad faith means to breach the implied obligation of good faith and fair dealing, an insurance company must, unreasonably or without proper cause, act or fail to act in a manner that deprives the insured of the benefits of the policy. It is not a mere failure to exercise reasonable care. However, it is not necessary for the insurer to intend to deprive the insured of the benefits of the policy. Generally, the term bad faith for insurance purposes means an insurance company:

• Unreasonably denies a claim;
• Unreasonably delays the claims process;
• Unreasonably terminates the claim
• Unreasonably underpays a claim.

Who Can Bring Action for California Insurance Bad Faith?

Both first and third party can bring suit for insurance bad faith.

What is a First Party Insurance Claim

First party claims are made between its policyholder or insured and the insurance company. These type of claims are contractual by nature and are contingent on the language of the insurance policy. For the insurer to fulfill its obligation not to impair the right of the insured to receive the benefits of the agreement, it again must give at least as much consideration to the latter's interests as it does to its own." (Egan v. Mutual of Omaha Insurance Co. (1979) 24 Cal.3d 809, 818 - 819 [169 Cal.Rptr. 691, 620 P.2d 141].)

What is a Third Party Insurance Claim

Third party insurance claim is made by a party that is not a named policyholder or insured. The most common type of third party insurance claim would be a liability claim i.e, you were rear-ended up by another driver and filed a claim with his/her insurance company.

Types of California Insurance Bad Faith Claim

Insurance Bad Faith in California Video

/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/output_HD72010.mp4

Los Angeles Insurance Attorney

If you believe that your insurance company may be acting in bad faith, speak to a Los Angeles insurance attorney for a consultation. Call our office at {meta.phoneFormatted}, our attorneys speak English, Spanish, Armenian, Russian, Ukrainian, French, and Italian.

Location & Directions

Location: 815 E Colorado St #220, Glendale, CA 91205 Telephone: {meta.phoneFormatted} Email: [email protected] KAASS Law is authorized to practice law in California. The above content is intended for California residents only. This content provides only general information which may or may not reflect current legal developments. KAASS Law expressly disclaims all liability in respect to actions taken or not taken based on any of the contents of this website. The above content DOES NOT create an attorney-client relationship. KAASS Law does not represent you unless you have expressly retained KAASS Law in person at the KAASS Law office. KAASS Law helps clients in: Los Angeles, Burbank, Hollywood, Glendale, Van Nuys, North Hollywood, Studio City, Highland Park, Eagle Rock, Sunland, Tujunga, Sylmar, La Crescenta, La Canada, Beverly Hills, Westwood, Santa Monica, Brentwood. Pacoima, Montebello, Commerce, Alhambra, Downey, Bell, Maywood, Walnut Park, Vernon, Lynwood, Echo Park, Silverlake, Mission Hills, Northridge, Woodland Hills, Encino, Canoga Park, North Hills, Porter Ranch, Chatsworth, Reseda.

Determining Who is at Fault in a Left Turn Motorcycle Crash

Under California Vehicle Code § 21801 (a) The driver of a vehicle intending to turn to the left or to complete a U-turn . . . shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles approaching from the opposite direction which are close enough to constitute a hazard at any time during the turning movement, and shall continue to yield the right-of-way to the approaching vehicles until the left turn or U-turn can be made with reasonable safety. According to California Civil Jury Instructions (CACI) a "hazard" exists if: "any approaching vehicle is so near or is approaching so fast that a reasonably careful person would realize that there is a danger of a collision [or accident]." In other words, the driver who is attempting to make a left turn must ensure that no oncoming vehicles are close enough to be a hazard before he or she proceeds across each lane the driver of a vehicle will yield the right of way, until the turn may be made with reasonable safety.

Determining Fault in a Left Turn Motorcycle Accident

Before we dive into determining fault in a left turn motorcycle collision, it is important to understand the term "Negligence", which is a term used to characterize conduct that creates an unreasonable risk of harm to others. In order to prove negligence you must prove:

• The defendant owed a duty toward the plaintiff (i.e. reasonable care for other's safety)
• The defendant failed to act in a reasonable way, or breached its duty (for example, a driver was reckless, drunk, ran a stop sign, or was speeding)
• The defendant's breach was the actual cause of another's injuries
• The defendant's breach was the proximate cause of the injuries (the defendant should have known that the breach would cause injury)
• The plaintiff suffered actual injuries, for which he or she may claim damages

In theory both a rider and the motorist can potentially be partially responsible for causing the left turn collision. For instance under the comparative negligence theory a party may contribute to an act of negligence or be comparatively negligent for his or her own injuries. However, it is important to remember that recovery for damages will be reduced by the percentage of fault associated with that matter. For instance, if you were found 20% at fault for causing the accident, your settlement and or judgement will be reduced by 20% of the entire dollar amount settled or awarded.

Problems with Left Turn Motorcycle Accident Insurance Claims

There are several problems with this. First off, even if there is a traffic collision report, stating that the driver of the car was at fault, the traffic collision report is hearsay. As a matter of fact, it cannot get admitted as evidence to prove the dynamics of the motorcycle accident. Also, the insurance company also doesn't have to consider this as proof of fault. The insurance company attorneys not having to consider the traffic accident report, will begin placing blame on the innocent victim. They might claim, the rider wasn't being inattentive. Or they may say you weren't riding at a safe speed during the collision. Then again, they might claim the rider should have yielded. The Endless Insurance Company Excuses. They can also claim the motorcyclist was not wearing bright enough clothing or anything else. Hence they may argue the motorcyclist at fault instead of the insured auto driver. So besides being worried about getting your bike fixed and custom motorcycle parts, now you have to PROVE it was not your fault.

Proving Negligence in California Motorcycle Accident Insurance Claim

Negligence determines who was at fault and their degree of the blame. Both a rider and the motorist can be partially responsible. The biker can still recover money. Some of these accidents take place due to the motorcyclist passing a larger vehicle in the same travel lane. In fact, that could have obscured him from an oncoming vehicle turning left. The other motorist usually fails to have enough reaction time to complete the left turn safely. This makes the car into a wall of steel, ejecting the rider from their bike. The rider may have been reckless. So starting a motorcycle lawsuit is not always the answer. A unique factor to consider remains that most insurance companies refuse to pay money after a rider gets smacked down.

Hire a Los Angeles Motorcycle Accident Lawyer

We provide 24/7 motorcycle accident hot line available for victims involved in motorcycle accidents. Speak to a Los Angeles motorcycle accident attorney today. Our motorcycle accident lawyers charge our clients' zero upfront legal fees. You pay nothing until and unless we successfully secure a settlement or judgement.

Typical scenarios include:

• A rider is passing a vehicle that had blocked him from view
• The rider driving towards an intersection A rider overtaking the biker and cuts left in from on him, sideswiping the rider, etc.
• Let's face it; motorcycles have a low, narrow nomenclature. Many motorists simply don't see the bike until it is too late. Situational awareness on the open road is a key factor in avoidance of vehicle accidents. Many drivers traversing down the highway are inattentive. This egregious behavior makes the offending motorists liable for the rider's torment and costs of convalescence.

Experienced and inexperienced riders must be ready to deal with every roadside contingency in as little as microseconds. Motorcycle accidents normally occur blue and are totally unpredictable. Only sturdy boots, helmets and other gear reduce harm. But when coupled with training and muscle memory it can prevent harm.

How to Make a Correct Left-Hand Turn.

• At the outset, a car operator needs to not be a jerk and pay attention. This elementary action will save lives and on trips to the courthouse. Below is a checklist for all road users. Also, it should help riders and other motorists understand the rules of the road. That way maybe they can exercise some basic civility too.
• Always utilize your turn signal when approaching the turn. Slow the vehicle down and give yourself time to scan the road at least 70 or so feet in front of yourself.
• Don't jump lanes. Assure that you are actually in the correct lane and don't make unsafe, last minute lane changes when approaching the turn.
• Exercise extreme care when at the intersection. Stay idle until safe to move. You must have optimum situational awareness before turning.
• Lastly, the law requires that you give the right of way to pedestrians and oncoming traffic.

Avoiding Motorcycle Accident Tips

• Negotiate the turn by staying right of the center line divider, and don't jump lanes. Stay in your same predesignated lane. This means stay in the inner lane. The outside lane is designated for motorists who are negotiating right-hand turns.
• Always look left and right and in both rear view mirrors immediately before making the maneuver.
• Do not speed, especially at a four-way intersection. You may not have enough time to slow and avoid a head on hazard as you head towards the lights.

We provide 24/7 motorcycle accident hotline available for victims involved in motorcycle accidents. Speak to a Los Angeles motorcycle accident attorney today. Our attorneys speak English, Spanish, Armenian, Russian, Ukrainian, French, and Italian.

Location & Directions

Location: 815 E Colorado St #220, Glendale, CA 91205 Telephone: {meta.phoneFormatted} Email: [email protected] KAASS Law is authorized to practice law in California. The above content is intended for California residents only. This content provides only general information which may or may not reflect current legal developments. KAASS Law expressly disclaims all liability in respect to actions taken or not taken based on any of the contents of this website. The above content DOES NOT create an attorney-client relationship. KAASS Law does not represent you unless you have expressly retained KAASS Law in person at the KAASS Law office. KAASS Law helps clients in: Los Angeles, Burbank, Hollywood, Glendale, Van Nuys, North Hollywood, Studio City, Highland Park, Eagle Rock, Sunland, Tujunga, Sylmar, La Crescenta, La Canada, Beverly Hills, Westwood, Santa Monica, Brentwood. Pacoima, Montebello, Commerce, Alhambra, Downey, Bell, Maywood, Walnut Park, Vernon, Lynwood, Echo Park, Silverlake, Mission Hills, Northridge, Woodland Hills, Encino, Canoga Park, North Hills, Porter Ranch, Chatsworth, Reseda.

US citizens and legal permanent residents can sponsor their family members for a green card. Particularly, a US citizen can sponsor his spouse, children, parents and siblings, while a legal permanent resident can sponsor his spouse and unmarried children. The petitioner willing to sponsor his relative and the beneficiary family member shall go through certain procedure to obtain green card for the family member.

Filing the Petition for Alien Relative with USCIS

The initial step in the process of sponsoring a family member for a green card is filing the Petition for Alien Relative with USCIS. The USCIS Form I-130, Petition for Alien Relative, shall be used for initiating the sponsorship process. The current version of the Form I-130 can be found on the USCIS website (www.uscis.gov/forms).

The petition contains information about the petitioner, the beneficiary family member, and their relationship. The petitioner shall file the petition with all the documents showing that the family member qualifies for the sponsorship. The list of supporting documents is different based on the family relationship between the petitioner and the beneficiary. However, the main purpose of the supporting documents is to show that the petitioner is a US citizen or a legal permanent resident, and that the required family relationship exists between the petitioner and the beneficiary.

The petition is filed in the appropriate USCIS office based on the address of the petitioner. The petition is considered properly filed if it is signed by the petitioner, and the filing fee is paid. The current filing fee for the Form I-130 is $535 which shall be paid simultaneously with filing the petition for family member unless the petitioner qualifies for a fee waiver.

Obtaining the Green Card after the Approval of the Petition for Alien Relative

The approval of the petition for family member does not mean that the beneficiary family member will automatically get his green card. After the approval of the petition the family member has to apply to the consulate in his home country to obtain immigrant visa to enter the US as a legal permanent resident or has to submit an application to adjust his status if he is already in the US. However, not in all the cases the family member can apply to the consulate or file the application to adjust his status immediately after the approval of the petition.

Immigrant Visa is Immediately Available to The Spouse, Parents and Unmarried Children Under 21 of US citizens

The approval of a US citizen's petition for his spouse, parents or unmarried children under 21, so called immediate relatives, makes the immigrant visa immediately available for the beneficiary family member. This means that right after the approval of the petition immediate relatives can apply to the consulate in their home country and obtain an immigrant visa to enter the US as permanent residents.

If beneficiary family members falling under the immediate relative category are already in the US they can obtain their permanent resident status by filing an application to adjust status with USCIS. The application to adjust status can be filed simultaneously with the petition for alien relative or right after the approval of the petition. Generally, immediate relatives planning to adjust their status in the US file their application together with their family member's petition for alien relative.

However, it should be noted that the family member planning to adjust his status should qualify for the adjustment of status. There are certain circumstances that might bar a person's eligibility to adjust his status in the US. One of the most common bars to adjustment of status is illegal entry to the US. On the other side, overstaying a visa does not bar an immediate relative's eligibility to adjust his status.

Family Members Falling Under One of The Preference Categories Shall Wait Until Their Immigrant Visa Becomes Available

The approval of the petition for alien relative does not make the immigrant visa immediately available for family members of US citizens who do not fall under the immediate relative category or for family members of legal permanent residents. The waiting time for these family members depend on the family preference category under which they fall and their country of citizenship.

The Immigration and Nationality Act divides family members of US citizens and legal permanent resident into four preference categories:

1) First Preference – unmarried sons and daughters of US citizens who are 21 and older;

2) Second Preference – spouses and unmarried sons and daughters of legal permanent residents;

3) Third Preference – married sons and daughters of US citizens;

4) Fourth Preference – brothers and sisters of US citizens.

Specific limit is set on the number of visas that can be issued in each preference category. US consulates abroad cannot issue more visas than the number allocated to the specific preference category. The number of petitions for family members considerably exceeds the number of visas allocated for the preference categories. Therefore, a substantial backlog has been created, and the family members of US citizens and permanent resident have to wait for long years until their visa becomes available. It should also be noted that there is a per country limit on issuance of visas each year as a result of which citizens of certain countries have to wait much longer than others.

US Department of State publishes a monthly visa bulletin which specifies the waiting times for all preference categories for all the countries. The visa bulletin states how long the family member will have to wait after the petitioner properly files the petition for alien relative, so called priority date. For example, pursuant to the last visa bulletin, unmarried sons and daughters of US citizen who are 21 and older and who are citizens of Mexico shall wait for 21 year until their visa becomes available, citizens of Philippines falling under the same category will have to wait for 11 years, while citizens of all other countries will have to wait for 6 years. The link to the most recent visa bulletin can be found here

Once the visa becomes available, the family member can apply to the consulate in his home country to obtain an immigrant visa to enter the US or to apply to adjust his status if he is in the US and qualifies for adjustment of status.

For certain family members of US citizens falling under the category of immediate relatives it does not take long to immigrate to the US because their immigrant visa becomes immediately available after the approval of the petition for alien relative. However, family members who fall under one of the preference categories discussed above have to wait for years until their immigrant visa becomes available.

Give our immigration attorneys a call for a consultation. We speak English, Spanish, Armenian, Russian, Ukrainian, French, and Italian.

KAASS Law is authorized to practice law in California. The above content is intended for California residents only. This content provides only general information which may or may not reflect current legal developments. KAASS Law expressly disclaims all liability in respect to actions taken or not taken based on any of the contents of this website. The above content DOES NOT create an attorney-client relationship. KAASS Law does not represent you unless you have expressly retained KAASS Law in person at the KAASS Law office.

KAASS Law helps clients in: Los Angeles, Burbank, Hollywood, Glendale, Van Nuys, North Hollywood, Studio City, Highland Park, Eagle Rock, Sunland, Tujunga, Sylmar, La Crescenta, La Canada, Beverly Hills, Westwood, Santa Monica, Brentwood. Pacoima, Montebello, Commerce, Alhambra, Downey, Bell, Maywood, Walnut Park, Vernon, Lynwood, Echo Park, Silverlake, Mission Hills, Northridge, Woodland Hills, Encino, Canoga Park, North Hills, Porter Ranch, Chatsworth, Reseda.

If you are an individual or a business entity that is using or is willing to use a mark in relation to your business you have probably thought about registering the mark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office. An application to register a trademark can be made only if the applicant's situation falls under one of the grounds for registration specified by the Lanham Act, also known as the Trademark Act of 1946. The Lanham Act provides four different bases for registering a trademark.

• Registration Based On Prior Actual Use Of The Mark In Commerce

Pursuant to the Lanham Act, the owner of a trademark used in commerce may request registration of its trademark on the principal register. 15 U.S.C. 1051(a)(1). This section of the Lanham Act gives a right to individuals and business entities to register a trademark if they have actually used it in commerce. The Section 45 of the Lanham Act defines "use in commerce" as a "...bona fide use of a mark in the ordinary course of trade and not merely to reserve a right in the mark." 15 U.S.C 1027. For goods, the use in commerce requires (a) placement of the mark on the goods, their containers, the displays associated with goods, the tags or labels affixed to goods or, if such placement is impracticable because of the nature of the goods, on documents associated with goods or their sale, and (b) that the goods be sold or transported in commerce. Id. For services, the use in commerce requires that the mark be used or displayed in the sale or advertising of services and that the services be rendered in commerce. Id. Pursuant to this basis for registration, the applicant must first use the mark in commerce. Once the mark is used in commerce the applicant can file the application to register the trademark.

• Intent To Use Application

The Lanham Act also allows filing an application for registration if the applicant has a bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce. 15 U.S.C. 1051(a)(2). Here, the applicant has not used the mark in commerce yet, however, he has a bona fide intention to make such use in future. The bona fide intent requirement means that there must be an actual intent to use a mark and evidence objectively demonstrating such intent. Aktieselskabet AF 21. November 2001 v. Fame Jeans Inc. (2008) 525 F.3d 8, 21. It should be noted, that although the Lanham Act allows to file the intent to use application before using the mark in commerce, the registration of the mark will not be granted unless the applicant files a proof that he has used the mark in commerce. After filing the statement of use application, if the mark is registrable and no successful opposition is filed, the US Patent and Trademark Office will issue a notice of allowance which will give the applicant time to file a statement showing that the mark was used in commerce. The applicant has a maximum of thirty six month after the date of issuance of the notice of allowance to show the actual use of the mark in commerce. The applicant shall comply with this requirement by filing the statement of use application with evidence showing the use of the mark in commerce. Only after filing the proper statement of use application the applicant can obtain the actual registration of the trademark.

• Applications By Foreign Nationals With A Foreign Application Or Registration

Pursuant to the Section 44 of the Lanham Act, if a foreign national's country of origin is a party to an international trademark treaty signed by the United States, and if he has or has applied for trademark registration in the foreign country, the foreign national with a bona fide intent to use the trademark in US can file an application with the United States Patent and Trademark Office to register the same trademark. 15 U.S.C. 1126. This section of the Lanham Act is intended to give privilege to nationals of foreign countries who have entered the same international trademark treaties with the US. This basis gives an opportunity to foreign nationals to register a trademark if they already have a registration or application in their home country. It should also be noted that in this case the applicant does not have to show the actual use of the mark in the US in order to obtain registration of the mark. If the applicant has bona fide intent to use the trademark in the US and he already has a registration or application in his home country that will suffice for registering the mark in the US.

• Application To Extend The Protection To The United States Under The Madrid Protocol

"[T]he holder of an international registration shall be entitled to the benefits of extension of protection of that international registration to the United States to the extent necessary to give effect to any provision of the Madrid Protocol." 15 U.S.C. 1141E(a). This section of the Lanham Act is intended to enforce the provisions of the Madrid Protocol which is designed to facilitate the registration of trademarks in several nations. This basis gives an opportunity to applicants who have international registration pursuant to the Madrid protocol to extend the protection of the mark to the US. It should be noted that the applicant does not have to show actual use of the mark in the US for the extension of protection. The international registration of the mark and the applicant's bona fide intent to use the mark in the US will be enough for registering the mark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office. If your situation falls under one of the four bases for registration described above you can consider registering your trademark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office. If you have questions regarding trademarks or even trademark infringement, give us a call and speak to one of our experienced Glendale business law attorneys. KAASS Law is authorized to practice law in California. The above content is intended for California residents only. This content provides only general information which may or may not reflect current legal developments. There are Three Different Bases for the Waiver of the Requirement of Filing the Joint Petition to Remove ConditionsINA identifies three different grounds for the waiver of the requirement of filing the joint petition to remove conditions on residence: (a) if extreme hardship would result in case the conditional resident is removed; or (b) if the conditional resident and his spouse entered into the marriage in good faith, and the conditional resident is not at fault in failing to file the joint petition to remove the conditions on residence; or (c) if the qualifying marriage was entered in good faith, during the marriage the alien spouse was battered by or was the subject of extreme cruelty perpetrated by her spouse and the alien was not at fault in failing to file the joint petition to remove the conditions on residence. Id. § 216(c)(4). The grounds for waiver specified in INA § 216(c)(4) are separate and independent bases for waiving the requirement of filing the joint petition to remove the conditions on residence. Matter of Balsillie, 20 I. &. N. Dec. 486 (B.I.A. 1992). However, if the conditional resident qualifies for a waiver on different grounds he can include all the bases in his petition. The conditional resident shall file the request for a waiver by using the Form I-751, Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence, which is also used for filing the joint petition to remove conditions. The most updated version of the form can be found on the USCIS website. The petition shall be filed with all the supporting documents showing that the conditional resident qualifies for the specific ground for waiver. If the petitioner is able to demonstrate that he meets the requirements for the waiver his petition will be approved and he will get the permanent green card. Although your marriage was terminated during the conditional residency period you still can obtain your permanent green card if you qualify for a waiver of the requirement to file a joint petition to remove conditions on residence. If you have questions regarding waivers of the requirement to file joint petition to remove conditions on residence or any other immigration law questions give us a call and receive a consultation with one of our experienced Glendale immigration lawyers. KAASS Law is authorized to practice law in California. The above content is intended for California residents only. This content provides only general information which may or may not reflect current legal developments. KAASS Law expressly disclaims all liability in respect to actions taken or not taken based on any of the contents of this website. The above content DOES NOT create an attorney-client relationship. KAASS Law does not represent you unless you have expressly retained KAASS Law in person at the KAASS Law office. KAASS Law helps clients in: Los Angeles, Burbank, Hollywood, Glendale, Van Nuys, North Hollywood, Studio City, Highland Park, Eagle Rock, Sunland, Tujunga, Sylmar, San Bernardino, La Crescenta, La Canada, Beverly Hills, Westwood, Santa Monica, Brentwood. Pacoima, Montebello, Commerce, Alhambra, Downey, Bell, Maywood, Walnut Park, Vernon, Lynwood, Echo Park, Silverlake, Mission Hills, Northridge, Woodland Hills, Encino, Canoga Park, North Hills, Porter Ranch, Chatsworth, Reseda.