true and accurate copy of the original label for Leslie’s Chlorinator Tablets 1” approved by the EPA in August 1975”). Exhibit A consists of two pages (15a-16a)the front and back labels of the container, each stamped as "ACCEPTED” under FIFRA on August 19, 1975; Appendix at 37a-39a (a portion of Exhibit C, correspondence from the EPA during Leslie's process of modifying and reregistering its labels, showing that Leslie's Certification with Respect to Citation of Data submitted in its application for registration attached two labels only — front and back); Appendix at 60a-62a (Exhibit E, the EPA’s Notice of Reregistration issued on June 20, 1994, which again contains two labels only — front and back). 8 . See Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr, 518 U.S. 470, 116 S.Ct. 2240, 135 L.Ed.2d 700 (1996) (<HOLDING>); see also Majority Opinion at p. 248
holding that congress use of requirement evinced an intent for broad preemption of state tort laws holding that a party did not waive its preemption defense where its answer did not specifically mention preemption but contained a broader defense that was capable of encompassing preemption holding that  502a may serve as an independent basis for preemption where  514a the blanket erisa preemption provision is inapplicable holding that preemption depends upon agency promulgation of a relevant requirement holding removal and preemption are distinct concepts erisa preemption does not allow removal unless complete preemption exists