TobaccoReporter logo

Tag: Federal court

  • Federal Judge Allows Deceptive Claim in Zyn Case

    Federal Judge Allows Deceptive Claim in Zyn Case

    A federal judge in Florida has allowed deceptive practices claims against Philip Morris International (PMI) and its subsidiaries to move forward, according to Law360. On December 12, U.S. District Judge William P. Dimitrouleas of the Southern District of Florida denied the companies’ motion to dismiss claims brought by plaintiff Kovadis Palmer under the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (FDUTPA).

    Palmer alleges that PMI and Swedish Match North America LLC misleadingly marketed Zyn nicotine pouches as “tobacco-free,” suggesting a lower addiction risk even though the nicotine is derived from tobacco. He claims he developed nicotine dependence as a result. While the court previously dismissed Palmer’s common-law fraud claims for failing to meet heightened pleading standards, it found that the amended FDUTPA claims advance a distinct legal theory.

    The judge ruled that FDUTPA claims do not require proof of intent to deceive and are not subject to the stricter fraud pleading rules. As a result, the court held that the claims are not merely a repackaging of dismissed fraud allegations and may proceed.

  • Virginia Defends Ban on Unauthorized Flavored E-Cigarettes in Federal Court

    Virginia Defends Ban on Unauthorized Flavored E-Cigarettes in Federal Court

    Virginia is pushing back against a challenge to its statewide ban on unauthorized flavored e-cigarettes, arguing in federal court that the restriction is both legally sound and critical to protecting youth from nicotine addiction. The law prohibits the sale of any flavored vaping product that has not been specifically authorized by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration—effectively barring nearly all flavored e-cigarettes currently on the market.

    In newly filed briefs, the state contends it has broad authority to regulate retail tobacco and nicotine sales to safeguard public health, pointing to rising youth vaping rates and the popularity of flavored disposable products. Virginia argues that the plaintiffs—primarily vape shop owners and industry groups—are seeking to bypass the FDA’s national regulatory framework, which requires companies to obtain marketing authorization for every product. Because the vast majority of flavored e-cigarettes have been denied or have not received FDA authorization, the state says the ban simply enforces existing federal law at the retail level.

    Plaintiffs claim the measure is unconstitutional, asserting it infringes on interstate commerce, unfairly harms small businesses, and effectively imposes a de facto prohibition. But Virginia maintains the law is narrowly tailored, does not conflict with federal authority, and is necessary to prevent youth from accessing high-nicotine flavored products that remain widely available despite federal restrictions. The case is being closely watched as the outcome could set a significant precedent for state-level enforcement of federal tobacco regulations.