TobaccoReporter logo

Tag: lawsuit

  • Judge Allows NYC Lawsuit Against Vape Wholesalers to Proceed

    Judge Allows NYC Lawsuit Against Vape Wholesalers to Proceed

    A Manhattan federal judge denied a motion to dismiss a lawsuit brought by New York City against eight vape wholesalers accused of distributing illegal flavored e-cigarettes. Judge Gregory H. Woods determined that the city’s claims were plausible and that the defendants had likely violated federal, state, and local laws regarding the sale of flavored e-cigarettes. 

    Originally filed in state court, the city alleges the companies—Pod Juice, EVO Brands, Midwest Goods Inc., MYLÉ VAPE Inc., MVH I, Inc., Puff Bar Inc., Safa Goods LLC, and Mi-One Brands—violated local and federal laws by “flooding” the market with flavored vapes, despite a citywide ban on such products. The ruling allows the city’s case to move forward, reinforcing its efforts to crack down on youth-targeted vaping products.

    The defendants had argued the lawsuit was preempted by federal law, but the court disagreed, citing the city’s authority to enforce local public health protections.

  • Samsung Back on $10.9M Hook for Vape Battery Explosion

    Samsung Back on $10.9M Hook for Vape Battery Explosion

    Samsung Electronics America Inc. must pay $10.9 million to a Georgia man who said he was seriously injured when the company’s battery inside an e-cigarette device in his pants pocket exploded, the Georgia Court of Appeals ruled Monday (June 23).

    Jordan Brewer sued Samsung in July 2020, and a county judge held Samsung liable by default in September 2020 after the company failed to respond to Brewer’s complaint. In December 2020, Samsung asked the court to set aside the default judgment, but the court said, “Samsung’s action in pursuing its company protocol in response to similar lawsuits as ‘a failed legal strategy’ that was ‘willful and deliberate and done with indifference to the correct legal process or else was gross negligence.’”

    In 2022, however, Samsung filed a motion with a new judge, who set aside the judgment, citing unclear damages and a lack of a hearing transcript. Brewer appealed, arguing Samsung didn’t meet its burden to justify overturning the judgment.

    This week, the Georgia Court of Appeals ruled that the trial court improperly shifted the burden of proof to Brewer and should not have set aside the judgment based on an incomplete record. The court vacated the order, setting aside the judgment and remanded for reconsideration under the correct legal standard. Since that judgment is now vacated, Samsung’s related appeal trying to open the default was ruled premature and dismissed.

  • Trucking Company Sued for Overcharging Smokers

    Trucking Company Sued for Overcharging Smokers

    An ex-employee of Marten Transport Ltd. is suing the trucking company in Wisconsin federal court, alleging that a tobacco surcharge in its health plan violates federal antidiscrimination law by charging workers who smoke an extra $780 per year for their health-care coverage than those who don’t, without offering a legally compliant way to avoid the penalty.

    In the complaint, plaintiff Mark Maurer said going forward, workers can avoid these penalties by participating in quit-smoking programs, but there’s no way for them to be reimbursed for fees they’ve already paid. This runs afoul of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, which allows health plans to charge higher rates to tobacco-using employees only if they provide a “reasonable alternative standard” that allows workers to have the full penalty waived without quitting smoking, the complaint said.

    According to Hylant Law, numerous class-action lawsuits have recently been filed against employers alleging that health plan premium surcharges related to tobacco use violate federal compliance requirements. These lawsuits have been filed by current and former employees of major U.S. companies, such as PepsiCo, Walmart, Target and Whole Foods, who have paid more in premiums due to their tobacco use, often hundreds of dollars more per employee per year.

    A handful of employers have agreed to class-wide settlements over similar cases, including Bass Pro Group LLC for $5 million, Lippert Components Inc. for $310,000, and UGN Inc. for $299,000.

  • Baltimore Sues PMI for “Peddling Zyn to Kids”

    Baltimore Sues PMI for “Peddling Zyn to Kids”

    The City of Baltimore filed a lawsuit against Philip Morris yesterday (May 7) in the city’s Circuit Court for violating Baltimore’s Consumer Protection Ordinance through deceptive marketing practices to “peddle Zyn oral nicotine pouches to minors.” The city said PMI used “Big Tobacco’s well-developed playbook” to deceptively market flavored Zyn nicotine pouch products and hook a new generation of nicotine users.”

    “The purpose of creating a flavored tobacco product is clear — it is meant to capture children and adolescents,” the city’s complaint says.

    The complaint cites recent research that nearly 2% of middle and high school students report using nicotine pouches, and a separate survey where more than two-thirds of underage respondents reported Zyn as their favorite brand of tobacco pouches.

    In response, officials from PMI said, “Although we have not yet been served with the complaint and are not in a position to comment, we can assure you that the interests of PMI and its affiliates will be vigorously defended.”

    This is not the first time the city has targeted nicotine-related products with a lawsuit alleging deceptive marketing. Baltimore sued Juul Labs Inc. in 2020, accusing the electronic cigarette maker of promoting to minors. In September, the city reached an $8 million settlement with the California-based company.

  • Dem Lawsuit Wants HHS “Restructure” Undone

    Dem Lawsuit Wants HHS “Restructure” Undone

    A group of Democratic-led states filed a lawsuit today (May 5) to challenge the Trump administration’s decision to fire 10,000 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services employees. Filed in federal court in Providence, Rhode Island, attorneys general from 19 states and the District of Columbia said the job cuts and agency consolidations U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy announced in late March unconstitutionally stripped the department of the resources necessary to do its job.

    The layoffs, in addition to earlier buyout offers and firings of probationary employees, reduced the number of full-time HHS employees from 82,000 to 62,000 and left key offices unable to perform statutory functions, the lawsuit said.

    As part of the restructuring plan, HHS said it was also collapsing 28 divisions into 15 and closing half of its 10 regional offices.

    The states argue that Kennedy lacked the authority to launch the widespread layoffs and restructuring and that the administration violated the U.S. Constitution by usurping Congress’ authority to create and fund agencies’ operations. The states asked a judge to block HHS from implementing Kennedy’s plan announced on March 27, prevent the department from being dismantled, and force the administration to restore health

    HHS declined to comment on the lawsuit. It previously said the restructuring was necessary to streamline its functions and that the layoffs would save taxpayers $1.8 billion annually.

  • Gurkha, Davidoff Settle “Year of the Dragon” Lawsuit

    Gurkha, Davidoff Settle “Year of the Dragon” Lawsuit

    Last week, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida approved the request from both sides’ attorneys to dismiss the case of Gurkha Cigar Group Inc. v. Davidoff of Geneva USA Inc. in the battle over the Year of (the) Dragon name. Judge William P. Dimitrouleas dismissed the case with prejudice, however, little is known about the settlement other than both parties agreed to pay for their court costs.

    Halfwheel reported that Davidoff did not reply to a request for comment, but Bianca Lopez, director of marketing for Gurkha, said, “It was an amicable agreement that was reached.”

    Gurkha has an arrangement to license the trademarks from K. Hansotia & Co., Inc., a company presumably named after Gurkha’s owner Kaizad Hansotia. Those trademarks include a variety of dragon-related words within the cigar industry, including dragon, dragon fire, dragon lord, dragonslayer, imperial dragon, red dragon, and royal dragon. The company also filed for a trademark on “Year of Dragon,” which Davidoff & Cie SA opposed.

    “It’s unclear what impact the settlement will have on the trademark process, which was suspended due to this lawsuit, which Gurkha filed in late 2023,” Charlie Minato wrote for Halfwheel. “In late 2023, Davidoff released the Davidoff Limited Edition 2024 Year of the Dragon cigar as part of its long-running Zodiac Series, which is named after the various symbols on the Chinese zodiac calendar. Davidoff was hardly alone. Asylum, De Los Reyes, Drew Estate, El Septimo, General Cigar Co., Habanos S.A., J.C. Newman, JM Tobacco, La Galera, Oliva, Maya Selva, Plasencia, Rocky Patel, United Cigars, and Vega Fina also introduced Year of the Dragon-themed cigars. There’s no evidence that any other company was sued other than Davidoff.”

    “Gurkha released its own dragon-themed cigars, five different blends using the Year of the Dragon name. Both companies—as well as a host of others—also released Year of (the) Snake cigars. K. Hansotia & Co. has a trademark on Year of Snake.”

  • Federal Judge Allows Zyn Lawsuit to Progress

    Federal Judge Allows Zyn Lawsuit to Progress

    A federal judge in Florida allowed key claims to move forward in two consumer class action lawsuits against Philip Morris and its subsidiary, Swedish Match, over allegations that their Zyn nicotine pouches cause ongoing health issues and are deceptively marketed, especially to young people.

    In March, U.S. District Judge William P. Dimitrouleas partially granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss, tossing a single claim of fraudulent concealment for lacking sufficient detail and a clear connection between the alleged misrepresentation and the plaintiffs’ injuries. However, the claims were reportedly dismissed without prejudice, giving the plaintiffs an opportunity to amend their complaints. The court upheld the bulk of the plaintiffs’ claims, including those for design defects, failure to warn, and negligence. The judge also rejected Philip Morris’ efforts to dismiss the lawsuits for lack of jurisdiction, finding that the companies’ business activities in Florida, including marketing and selling Zyn, provided sufficient basis for the federal court to hear the case.

    Plaintiffs in the Zyn lawsuits allege Philip Morris and Swedish Match falsely maintain Zyn is a smokeless nicotine replacement therapy from cigarettes or e-cigarettes, despite the nicotine concentration levels in Zyn exceeding the levels found in nicotine replacement therapies. Philip Morris said it is reviewing the ruling and intends to “vigorously defend” itself against the remaining claims.

  • Juul Cleared in Patent Dispute with Altria

    Juul Cleared in Patent Dispute with Altria

    The U.S. International Trade Commission affirmed a judge’s decision exculpating Juul in an infringement case brought by Altria-owned NJOY over several vaping patents. In January, Administrative Law Judge Doris Johnson Hines found that Juul did not violate Section 337 of the Tariff Act by importing vaping products, which Altria claimed was an infringement on two patents covering vaping technologies.

    In a three-page decision, the ITC reviewed the noninfringement finding to revise a citation in the judge’s initial determination that concluded NJOY “did not satisfy the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement, which requires the complainant to show that it has made significant investment in products protected by the patent,” Theresa Schliep wrote for Law 360.

    Concerning the economic prong, the ITC took “no position on these findings,” the decision said, and the ITC declined to review the remainder of the decision, including the judge’s conclusion that Juul did not violate Section 337.

    The Juul products the ITC investigated were “electronic nicotine delivery systems” and the cartridges or pods that go with them, as well as the pieces that make up the pods, such as “atomizers, subassemblies, devices subassemblies, [and] chargers,” according to court filings.

  • JTI and Others Close to Concluding Canadian Lawsuit

    JTI and Others Close to Concluding Canadian Lawsuit

    JTI-Macdonald Corp. (JTI-MC) announced that last week it, along with co-defendants Imperial Tobacco Canada (ITC), and Rothmans, Benson & Hedges (RBH), filed materials with the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in joint support of plans to settle all pending tobacco-related claims in Canada, subject to proposed amendments being approved by the court.  

    The filings stem from a 2019 class-action lawsuit, where in October 2024 the court-appointed mediator proposed the three companies pay a total of 32.5 billion Canadian dollars to settle all litigation. In January, JTI-MC reached an agreement with the other co-defendants on the terms of allocation of payments that were then filed with the Ontario Superior Court Feb. 27, which now awaits court approval.

    As a result, JTI-MC intends to record a provision for litigation losses related to the payment of the settlement amount as an operating expense in fiscal year 2024, for an adjusting subsequent event.

  • NY AG Files Lawsuit Against 12 Vape Companies

    NY AG Files Lawsuit Against 12 Vape Companies

    New York Attorney General Letitia James announced a lawsuit against 12 e-cigarette manufacturers, distributors, and retailers for “their role in fueling the youth vaping epidemic.” Those named in the lawsuit are Puff Bar, MYLE Vape, Pod Juice, Mi-One Brands, Happy Distro, Demand Vape, EVO Brands, PVG2, Magellan Technology, Midwest Goods, Safa Goods, and Price Point Distributors, as well as Price Point principals Weis Khwaja, Hamza Jalili, and Mohammad Jalili.

    “These companies are responsible for illegally distributing, marketing, and selling flavored disposable vapes, which have become extraordinarily popular among minors,” James said in a statement. “The vaping industry is taking a page out of Big Tobacco’s playbook: they’re making nicotine seem cool, getting kids hooked, and creating a massive public health crisis in the process.”

    In 2020, New York banned the sale of flavored vapor products, however, the products exploded in popularity globally in the past decade and are readily available at numerous outlets. The lawsuit seeks a “disgorgement of all revenues earned as a result of illegal activity” which would translate to hundreds of millions of dollars, as well as a permanent ban on flavored vapes in New York.

    “This punitive approach undermines American entrepreneurship and ignores the public health benefits of vaping as a smoking cessation tool,” Allison Boughner, the vice president of American Vapor Manufacturers, a trade group that represents vape makers and retailers, said in a statement. “This misguided action unfairly targets legitimate American businesses that employ thousands and contribute to local economies. Our members are dedicated to offering adult smokers safer alternatives to combustible cigarettes, supporting a mission of harm reduction backed by science and millions of successful former smokers.”

    Matthew Glauser, the chief strategy officer and a co-founder of Demand Vape, one of the companies named in the lawsuit, said in a statement that the suit was “wasting New York taxpayers’ money and federal court time, which desperately need to be focused on substantive issues that truly impact our communities.”

    According to the New York Times, Tony Abboud, the executive director of another industry group, Vapor Technology Association, disputed the suit’s claim that there was a youth vaping epidemic and called on President Trump “to take bold and decisive action to end the government lawfare against the flavored vaping industry.”