the provisions of this subchapter. 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 5533. Under Pennsylvania law, personal injury to a minor gives rise to two separate and distinct causes of action: one to the parents’ claim on behalf of the minor, and the other to the minor’s claim for losses after minority. Bowmas-ter v. Clair, 933 A.2d 86, 88 (Pa.Super.2007) (finding that because parents did not assert a claim on behalf of their minor during the applicable time period, their claims were time-barred). Although parents may pursue their claims while the child’s claim is barred due to minority, the claims of the parents are not derivative of their child’s claim and may be barred while the child’s is still assertable. Id. at 88, 89 (citing Hathi v. Krewstown Park Apartments, 385 Pa.Super. 613, 561 A.2d 1261, 1262 (1989) (<HOLDING>)); see also Fancsali v. Univ. Health Ctr. of
holding that section 1 claims of direct purchasers of buspirone products were not barred by the statute of limitations holding that parents were not entitled to use infancy tolling provisions and that the statute of limitations barred their claims holding that new yorks statute tolling statute of limitations during a period when a person is under a disability because of infancy is not terminated by acts of guardian or legal representative in taking steps to pursue claims on infants behalf holding that the plaintiffs claims under  22a452 were barred by the statute of limitations but declining to decide which statute to apply holding that the amended complaint could not relate back to the original complaint in which all claims were barred by the statute of limitations