Tag: R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.

RJR Ordered to Pay $3 Million to Sick Smoker

Photo: Alex
A Florida jury on May 24 ordered R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. (RJR) to pay roughly $3 million to a man suffering from chronic lung disease after decades of smoking, reports Courtroom View Network.
Plaintiff Roosevelt Gordon, who suffers from emphysema and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, will receive $447,000 for medical expenses and $2,522,880 for past and future pain and suffering.
Gordon blames his illness on the Winston cigarettes he began smoking as a teenager. RJR countered that Gordon chose to smoke despite knowing the risks to his health.
The plaintiff’s attorney argued that Gordon never saw the messages RJR put out about the health risks associated with smoking and that consumer expectations in decades past were very different than today.
The case, which is unrelated to the historic Engle class action, relied on only two claims—defective product and negligence—and demanded no punitive damages, which allowed it to reach a conclusion relatively quickly.
These two trials come on the heels of an April trial in Miami, where a jury cleared Philip Morris of any liability for a longtime smoker’s stroke.
In February, an Oregon jury returned a defense verdict for RJR over responsibility for a smoker’s fatal lung cancer.
May 26, 2021
ITC: IQOS Infringes on Vuse Patents

Photo: JHVEPhoto
Philip Morris International’s IQOS device infringes two patents owned by British American Tobacco subsidiary Reynolds American Inc., reports Bloomberg, citing a note posted by Judge Clark Cheney on the U.S. International Trade Commission’s website.
The next step is a likely review by the full commission, which has the power to halt products at the U.S. border and is scheduled to complete the investigation by Sept. 15.
IQOS is the only heat-not-burn product authorized for sale in the U.S., where it’s sold by Altria. Last year, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration allowed the company to market IQOS as reducing consumers’ exposure to harmful chemicals found in cigarettes.
Reynolds claims PMI and Altria copied patented technology that it had developed for its Vuse Vibe and Vuse Solo vaping products, for which it’s filed for FDA approval. The company complained to the ITC in April 2020.
Altria responded with its own patent infringement claims and a separate suit against Reynolds in May. Altria also lodged petitions with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office challenging the validity of a half-dozen Reynolds’ patents.

The judge has to make a determination on whether even temporarily removing such products is appropriate for public health and what alternatives there are for consumers.
Andre Calantzopoulos, executive chairman, PMI
Reynolds said it expects the judge will recommend an import ban, adding that the unauthorized use of its inventions “undermines our ability to invest and innovate and thereby reduce the health impact of our business.”
Philip Morris called the judge’s findings “one step in a long process that does not have an immediate effect” and it will present its position to the commission.
“BAT’s litigation in the U.S. is part of a worldwide attempt—which has been entirely unsuccessful to date—that is meant to undermine the heated-tobacco segment, where they lag far behind,” the company said.
PMI has also argued that, even if a patent violation is found, it’s not in the public’s interest to keep IQOS out of the U.S.
“The judge has to make a determination on whether even temporarily removing such products is appropriate for public health and what alternatives there are for consumers,” said PMI Executive Chairman Andre Calantzopoulos. “If we remove a product that exists, and the only alternative that people have are cigarettes, it’s a consideration of public health interest, and that has to be taken into account.”
May 18, 2021
Reynolds Cleared in Oregon Cancer Suit

Photo: succo from Pixabay
Oregon jurors on Feb. 19 cleared R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. of responsibility for the terminal lung cancer Patricia Rickman developed after decades of smoking the company’s cigarettes, reports the Courtroom View Network.
The case, Rickman v. R.J. Reynolds, turned in part on whether tobacco industry messaging swayed Rickman’s smoking decisions. Rickman claims that Reynolds’s participation in a decades-long campaign to misrepresent the health effects of smoking ultimately caused her cancer.
Reynolds countered that Rickman smoked despite knowing the dangers of cigarettes. Representing Reynolds, attorney Steven Geise told jurors Rickman began smoking years after mandatory warnings went onto cigarette packs and continued despite widespread information concerning smoking’s dangers.
The evidence, Geise said, undercut Rickman’s contention that she did not believe smoking was dangerous until about 2015. “It stretches the bounds of reason,” Geise said, “to think that somebody could go into the 2010s and not have any idea that cigarette smoking was bad.”
The plaintiff’s attorney had requested up to $12.7 million for Rickman plus loss-of-consortium damages for her husband and a finding that punitive damages were warranted.
February 22, 2021
Court Overturns $10.6 Million Verdict Against Reynolds

Photo: succo from Pixabay
A Florida appeals court on Feb. 10 overturned a $10.6 million verdict against R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. in a lawsuit involving a woman’s death from lung cancer, reports WUSF News.
A three-judge panel of the 4th District Court of Appeal ordered a new trial in the Broward County lawsuit for which a jury awarded $6 million in compensatory damages and $4.6 million in punitive damages to the estate of Janice Hamilton.
R.J. Reynolds argued in its appeal that a circuit judge improperly allowed a hearsay statement that centered on a conversation between Hamilton and her son when he was a teen. That hearsay statement was used to prove a “fraudulent concealment” claim against the cigarette maker.
The seven-page ruling said, “In order for plaintiff (Hamilton’s son as representative of the estate) to prevail on his conspiracy to commit fraud by concealment claim, he was required to prove that Mrs. Hamilton detrimentally relied on an act or statement made in furtherance of RJR’s agreement to conceal or omit material information concerning the health effects or addictive nature of cigarettes. Hamilton’s statement that filtered cigarettes were safe based on what she heard from advertising, in turn, was undoubtedly the strongest evidence of reliance in this case.”
February 12, 2021
RJR must continue legal payments for old brands

Photo: Okan Caliskan from Pixabay
The Florida Supreme Court on Friday declined to hear an appeal by R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. in a lawsuit rooted in a landmark legal settlement between Florida and leading tobacco companies.
The Supreme Court’s decision effectively let stand a July decision by the 4th District Court of Appeal that required R.J. Reynolds to make more than $100 million in disputed payments.
The 1997 settlement forced tobacco companies to pay hundreds of millions of dollars a year to the state because of smoking-related health costs. In exchange for the payments, the companies received liability protections.
But in the lawsuit, R.J. Reynolds contended that it should not have to make payments to the state related to four brands of cigarettes—Salem, Winston, Kool and Maverick—that it agreed to sell in 2014 to ITG Brands.
Upholding a ruling by a Palm Beach County circuit judge, an appeals court pointed to a lack of changes in the 1997 settlement that would have freed R.J. Reynolds from making the payments.
December 21, 2020
RJR Remains Liable for Litigation Payments

A Florida state appeals court ruled that R.J. Reynolds (RJR) owes the state $100 million from a 1997 settlement.
RJR argues that it should not have to make payments for the Salem, Winston, Kool and Maverick brands as RJR sold those brands to ITG Brands in 2015.
“We find, simply put, that a contract is a contract and that Reynolds continues to be liable under the contract it signed with the state of Florida,” said the court’s decision, written by Chief Judge Spencer Levine.
“The FSA (Florida Settlement Agreement) required that Reynolds make annual payments to the state of Florida in perpetuity, with no condition of termination, in exchange for the release of liability for past and future medical costs incurred by the state of Florida,” Levine wrote.
July 30, 2020
Court Upholds Verdict Against Reynolds

Photo: Tobacco Reporter archive
A three-judge panel of the 3rd District Court of Appeal from South Florida on July 15 upheld a $7.25 million verdict against R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. (RJR) in a lawsuit filed by a man who smoked two packs of cigarettes a day by age 17 and later suffered from coronary artery disease.
The panel rejected RJR’s arguments that the plaintiff had not proven an allegation related to the tobacco company fraudulently concealing the dangers of smoking. The appeal came after a Miami-Dade County jury awarded $5 million in compensatory damages and $2.25 million in punitive damages to the plaintiff.
“In sum, not only did [the plaintiff] Rouse present evidence that he was exposed throughout his life to the tobacco companies’ broad-based, misleading advertising campaign, he also testified that his decision to smoke Winston filtered cigarettes was influenced by the way the tobacco companies promoted filtered cigarettes in their advertisements,” the panel said in a statement.
“From this evidence, a reasonable jury could have inferred that Rouse might have never started smoking Winston filtered cigarettes or would have quit earlier had he known true facts about filtered cigarettes.”
July 17, 2020
PMI Countersues RJR For Patent Infringement

Photo: PMI
Philip Morris International (PMI) filed counterclaims against R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. (RJR) for patent infringement in the federal court action that RJR commenced against PMI and Altria, PMI’s IQOS distributor in the U.S., on April 9, 2020 in the Eastern District of Virginia.
PMI also filed a partial motion to dismiss RJR’s claims against it. PMI believes that RJR’s infringement action is without merit, and that RJR’s own electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) products infringe multiple patents owned by PMI and Altria. PMI is bringing counterclaims to recover “the considerable damages” caused by RJR’s infringements.
“RJR appears to have brought this action in the hopes of stopping [PMI’s] innovative IQOS heated tobacco system, which has a proven track record in switching smokers away from combustible cigarettes, from disrupting its core business in combustible cigarettes and overtaking its secondary line of e-vapor products,” the filing states.
“Having failed to develop a competing offering in the heated tobacco space, RJR apparently now seeks to block that space in its entirety by bringing this meritless litigation. But in its haste to do so, RJR has overlooked the fact that its own line of e-vapor products (which are far less effective in switching smokers away from combustible cigarettes than IQOS) infringe multiple patents owned by [PMI].”
The counterclaim alleges that RJR was concerned by the commercial threat posed by IQOS, and RJR is now attempting to stop IQOS with this case. “But in its haste to stop IQOS, RJR committed two fatal errors. First, it asserted meritless patent claims,” the filing states. “Second, it overlooked the fact that its own e-vapor products infringe multiple patents owned by [PMI] and co-defendants Altria Client Services and Philip Morris USA, Inc. [PMI] thus responds to RJR’s Complaint and brings counterclaims to recover the considerable damages flowing from RJR’s infringement.”
June 30, 2020