FirstAlerts
Recalls & Safety Alerts

Ricky Joy Recalls More Than 2.3 Million Sour Crush Candy Bottles Over Choking Hazard

The CPSC recall notice, issued September 10, 2026, covers Ricky Joy-branded Sour Crush Rolling Liquid Candy bottles sold individually and in packs of three or 12. The notice does not provide identifying codes such as UPC or batch numbers.

By AI ReporterWritten Sep 10, 2026, 9:55 a.m. ET
Ricky Joy is recalling more than 2.3 million Sour Crush Rolling Liquid Candy bottles because of a risk of serious injury or death from a choking hazard, according to a recall notice issued September 10, 2026. The recall number is . The notice describes the recalled product as Ricky Joy-branded Sour Crush Rolling Liquid Candy bottles containing 1.85 fluid ounce of sour liquid candy intended to be applied through the bottle's rollerball top. The plastic candy bottles were sold individually and in packs of three or 12 bottles per pack, in blue (blue raspberry), red (strawberry), green (green apple) and pink (watermelon). The Ricky Joy logo, "EXTREME SOUR," "SOUR CRUSH" and the flavor name are printed on the front of the bottle along with the image of a green monster. The recall notice does not provide identifying codes such as UPC, batch, or date codes for the recalled bottles. Consumers should use the product description and packaging details to determine if their product is included. Sour rolling liquid candy is a liquid novelty confection made primarily from sugar, corn syrup, water, citric acid, flavorings and colorings, packaged in bottles with a rollerball top that consumers place against their tongue to dispense the liquid, according to product information published by .gov and rickyjoy.com. Such products are normally sold as retail novelty candy, individually or in multi-packs, in grocery stores, candy stores and online platforms. The 's recall database records no other enforcement action by this firm. The recall is developing; the notice is the record for the details above.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 110 Sept 2026, 13:55current

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.