Tag: litigation

  • Supreme Court to Hear Avail, Reynolds PMTA Case

    Supreme Court to Hear Avail, Reynolds PMTA Case

    TR Archives

    The Supreme Court of the United States has agreed to consider another case involving federal approval of vapes at the request of the Biden administration on Friday.

    The case arose after the Food and Drug Administration denied R.J. Reynolds Vapor Company’s request to introduce three flavored vapes on the market. The FDA said the company failed to meet federal requirements concerning tobacco products’ marketing, but the company contends that the decision was arbitrary and capricious.

    Reynolds is based in North Carolina, and the federal appeals courts located there and in D.C. already had precedent on the books unfavorable to the manufacturer.

    Under federal law, companies can challenge the FDA denying of a marketing order for a new tobacco product in Washington, D.C., or where the company’s principal place of business is located, reports The Hill.

    The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has been more sympathetic to the industry, making it an attractive place for companies to contest their products being denied.

    The 5th Circuit’s rule effectively enables it to host any tobacco company’s challenge, so long as its lawsuit is joined by a convenience store or other retail seller within the 5th Circuit’s borders—which span Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas.

    Reynolds instead filed its challenge in the 5th Circuit alongside Avail Vapor Texas and the Mississippi Petroleum Marketers and Convenience Stores Association. The federal government attempted to move venues, but the 5th Circuit said the additional challengers meant the case was properly brought.

    No matter which way the justices rule, they are not expected to address the merits of the FDA’s denial. The Supreme Court only took up the question of whether the 5th Circuit was a proper venue.

    “There is no circuit conflict over the meaning of this venue provision. And other vehicle problems abound,” the company wrote in court filings urging the justices to turn away the appeal. 

  • Court Dismisses Njoy Lawsuits, Allows Elf Bar

    Court Dismisses Njoy Lawsuits, Allows Elf Bar

    A U.S. District Court in California has dismissed a lawsuit filed by NJOY, the vape subsidiary of Altria Group, against multiple manufacturers, distributors, and retailers of disposable vapes. However, the case against IMiracle, the manufacturer of Elf Bar, has not been dismissed.

    NJOY filed the lawsuit last October. The company alleges that the companies named in the suit are selling products illegal in California and the United States. NJOY asked for a nationwide injunction that would prevent future importation and sale of the products, and compensatory and punitive damages paid to NJOY.

    Among the companies charged were manufacturers and distributors of Breeze, Elf Bar, Esco Bar, Flum, Juice Box, Lava Plus, Loon, Lost Mary, Mr. Fog and Puff Bar. Together the brands make up the majority of the U.S. disposable vape market.

    The dismissal order was entered on Jan. 18 by Judge Terry J. Hatter Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The court found that the defendants did not participate in “the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences,” and therefore were improperly joined in the lawsuit. Because of that, Judge Hatter dropped all parties from the suit except the first named defendant, IMiracle, according to media reports.

    The judge entered the orders “without prejudice” allowing NJOY to refile against the dismissed defendants individually or in smaller groups with demonstrable relationships. The court also dismissed NJOY’s claim of unfair competition and its motion for a preliminary injunction barring sales and distribution by the defendants.

    The court denied NJOY’s motion to serve IMiracle, the manufacturer of Elf Bar headquartered in Hong Kong, by email, citing an established international process, the Hague Convention, for serving legal notice to foreign defendants.

    NJOY’s lawsuit against IMiracle cannot proceed until the Chinese manufacturer is served notice.