Michael Sanders was a 40-year-old man who made his living as a member of various music bands throughout Fresno. Mr. Sanders graduated from Fresno State University in May 2004 and planned to teach music. On August 20, 2004, Fresno police officers responded to a call made at the Sanders' home. When the police entered, they found Mr. Sanders, who appeared disoriented, standing unclothed behind his wife, Lavette. The officers decided to subdue Mr. Sanders by firing Tasers at his naked body, although Fresno Police Department rules and other instructions require that Tasers not come in contact with human skin. The officers fired numerous Taser darts into Mr. Sanders' body. The officers then handcuffed Sanders, placed him face down on a gurney, which suffocated him, and then placed him in an ambulance. Sanders stopped breathing. One of the officers attempted CPR, but Michael Sanders was pronounced dead at 4:30 a.m. Ms. Sanders filed suit against the city of Fresno as well as Taser. She based her suit against Taser on, among other things, that Taser expressly warranted that the product was "safe" and "would not cause injuries to police officers or individuals arrested by police officers." is this the language of an express warranty? (Sanders v. City of Fresno, 2006 WL 1883394 (E.D. Cal 2006), 59 UCC Rep. Serv. 1209) What did the court say? What analysis did the court use to reach its conclusion?