Skip to Content

Overview

Dennis Raglin brings more than 30 years of experience counseling and defending clients regarding California's Proposition 65 right-to-know chemical warnings law. A tenacious litigator, Dennis has represented clients in high-stakes, bet-the-company cases. Because of the high risk, these cases rarely go to trial, but Dennis has tried three in the past four years, representing national food manufacturers and securing defense victories in each. He was also part of the team that secured a landmark victory in the California Court of Appeals, establishing that federal law preempts Prop 65 warnings for generic over-the-counter medications. In addition, Dennis has successfully negotiated favorable resolutions for national clients in high-profile Prop 65 suits brought by the California attorney general.

Dennis advises clients on a broad spectrum of state consumer chemical regulations, including PFAS, recycling, packaging, producer responsibility, tools, cosmetics, food, and personal care products. Recognizing the growing and evolving patchwork of these regulations, Dennis works with clients to understand them and minimize the challenges they present. He works closely with companies of all sizes to craft strategies that achieve practical, effective outcomes — whether through strengthened compliance programs, negotiated settlements, or litigation — always with an eye toward minimizing risk while maximizing results.

Dennis also has extensive experience defending product liability claims, particularly in the medical device and pharmaceutical sectors. He has been a member of multiple multidistrict litigation (MDL) teams in national litigation involving medical devices such as metal hip implants surgical sutures, and pharmaceutical cases involving claims of wrongful death from heartburn and migraine medications. He has served as California counsel for a national medical device manufacturer and has represented clients in over-the-counter pharmaceuticals, biologics, baby and toddler formula, and nutritional supplements.

A recognized thought leader in his field, Dennis is both a speaker and author. He has been a regular panelist at the annual Prop 65 Conference speaking about how to win trials and best defend against these cases, particularly regarding exposure in foods. He has presented to companies on Prop 65 and consumer chemical law compliance, green chemistry, PFAS chemicals, and best practices regarding understanding and staying in compliance with the multiplying requirements of states regulating in this area. He has also written extensively on the constitutionality of Prop 65 and federal preemption issues. In the medical and pharmaceutical arenas, Dennis has published and presented on FDA regulation of nutritional supplements, social media compliance policies for device and pharmaceutical companies, and scientific information exchange best practices.
 

Experience

Proposition 65 and Chemical-Related Matters
  • Achieved dismissal of 2025 Proposition 65 case during trial involving lead and arsenic in multiple spice products.
  • Served as consultant and litigation team member in a 2024 Proposition 65 trial involving lead in turmeric, resulting in a defense verdict.
  • Achieved 2023 defense verdict finding no Proposition 65 warning was required on a national rice manufacturer’s products.
  • Part of team securing 2023 appellate victory confirming federal law preempts Proposition 65 warnings for over-the-counter generic medications.
  • Negotiated favorable resolution with the California attorney general in a yearslong Proposition 65 claim involving lead in baby and toddler formulas.
  • Secured dismissal of Proposition 65 claims against national manufacturers and retailers regarding cadmium in antacids and lead/DEHP exposure in consumer products through dispositive expert evidence.
  • Secured multiple dismissals of supplement makers in a claim of excessive heavy metals in health food products.
Compliance Counseling
  • Counsel one of the world’s leading rice manufacturers on Proposition 65 compliance.
  • Advise trade associations and manufacturers on supply chain management, vendor certification, and compliance with state and federal chemical regulations, including PFAS, packaging, and personal care products.
  • Develop and review compliance programs for online marketplaces, including merchant education and contractual updates to address California chemical law and Proposition 65.
Medical Device and Pharmaceutical Product Liability
  • California counsel for a national medical device manufacturer, defending catastrophic and wrongful death claims involving products including power wheelchairs, hospital beds, oxygen machines, and cautery devices.
  • Served as part of trial team achieving defense verdict in case involving physician causing fire during surgery.
  • Part of trial teams representing international medical device companies and pharmaceutical manufacturers in multidistrict and complex state litigation, including claims of failure-to-warn and injury from artificial hips and prescription medications.
  • Secured defense verdicts, summary judgments, and dismissals in high-profile cases, including wrongful death and injury claims involving medical devices and metallic implants.

Professional and Community Involvement

  • American Bar Association
    • Executive Editor, Litigation Journal
  • State Bar of California
  • LA Animal Services, West Los Angeles
    • Senior Volunteer

Speaking Engagements

  • “Prop 65 Under Pressure: Updates, Compliance Strategies, and Enforcement Activity,” Annual Legal, Regulatory, and Compliance Forum on Cosmetics and Personal Care Products, American Conference Institute, Santa Monica, CA (October 9, 2025)
  • "Compliance Science: How Prop 65 Product Testing and Exposure Assessments Help Win Cases" (June 5, 2025)
  • "California's Proposition 65 Chemical Warnings Law," Deco '25, Society of Glass and Ceramic Decorated Products, Columbus, OH (April 27, 2025)
  • "California's Proposition 65 Chemical Warnings Law," Enheasa (January 30, 2025)
  • "Proposition 65 and Consumer Class Actions," 8th Annual Restaurant Legal Summit,  San Juan, PR (October 24, 2024)
  • "Beech-Nut Lives On: Calculating Exposure in Food," 2024 Proposition 65 Conference, Prop 65 Clearinghouse, San Francisco, CA (September 23, 2024)
  • "Consumer Chemical Regulation Update," Deco '24, Society of Glass and Ceramic Decorated Products, Louisville, KY (April 13, 2024)
  • "Compliance Science: Prop 65 and PFAS Exposure Assessments" (February 15, 2024)
  • "Chemical Law Update: Consumer Chemical Regulations and Best Practices" (December 14, 2023)
  • "A Guide to West Coast Packaging and Labeling Requirements for Cosmetics Manufacturers,” Annual Legal, Regulatory, and Compliance Forum on
    Cosmetics and Personal Care Products, American Conference Institute, Santa Monica, CA (September 28, 2023)
  • "Prop 65 and Testing Laboratories" and "Recent Prop 65 Appeals Decisions," 2023 Proposition 65 Conference, Prop 65 Clearinghouse, San Francisco, CA (September 18, 2023)
  • "California's Proposition 65: Latest Developments and Best Practices," Food Contact Regulations USA 2023, Chemical Watch Events and Training, Washington, D.C. (June 29, 2023)
  • "California Consumer Products Chemical Law Update: Prop 65, CA Green Chemistry, PFAS, and Chemical Reporting (June 21, 2023)
  • "CA Proposition 65 and PFAS Update," Deco '23, Society of Glass and Ceramic Decorated Products, Pittsburgh, PA (April 23, 2023)
  • "Proposition 65 Compliance for Online Marketplace Merchants," Wish.com (March 14, 2022)
  • "First Amendment Argument: Has Anything Changed?," 2020 Proposition 65 Conference, Prop 65 Clearinghouse (September 21, 2020)
  • "Innovative Defenses to Prop 65: Does Wheat Growers v. Becerra Resurrect Constitutional Challenges to California’s Proposition 65?" (August 13, 2020)

Credentials

Education

  • University of California, Davis, School of Law (J.D., 1995)
  • University of California, Riverside (B.A., cum laude, 1992)

Bar Admissions

Disclaimer

The information on this website is presented as a service for our clients and Internet users and is not intended to be legal advice, nor should you consider it as such. Although we welcome your inquiries, please keep in mind that merely contacting us will not establish an attorney-client relationship between us. Consequently, you should not convey any confidential information to us until a formal attorney-client relationship has been established. Please remember that electronic correspondence on the internet is not secure and that you should not include sensitive or confidential information in messages. With that in mind, we look forward to hearing from you.