Our team has previously written about the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) response to the Reagan-Udall Foundation report on the Center for Tobacco Product’s operations. If you missed our prior posts, check them out at the links below:
What RJ Reynolds’ Calif. Suit Means for Tobacco Regulation
Published in Law360 on June 27, 2023. © Copyright 2023, Portfolio Media, Inc., publisher of Law360. Reprinted here with permission.
On May 11, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. Inc. went on the offensive to keep its new line of nonmenthol cigarettes marketed with language like “crisp,” “smooth” and “mellow” on store shelves in California.[1]
Continue Reading What RJ Reynolds’ Calif. Suit Means for Tobacco Regulation
Congress Urges FDA to Complete Its Review of E-Cigarette Applications
On June 8, more than 50 members of Congress signed a letter addressed to Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Dr. Robert Califf, expressing concerns over FDA’s delays in reviewing pending Premarket Tobacco Product Applications (PMTAs) and its failure to remove unauthorized products from the market. The letter strongly urges “FDA to (1) expeditiously complete review of remaining e-cigarette PMTAs; (2) follow the science on the risks flavored [e-cigarettes] pose to youth and deny PMTAs for all non-tobacco flavored e-cigarettes, including menthol flavored products; and (3) increase enforcement actions against companies that make, distribute, and sell flavored products without a marketing order, especially products with a significant market share, or products that are most popular with youth.” The letter also requests that FDA respond to several questions by June 23, as summarized below (as of the date of this blog post, we are not aware of any FDA response).
Continue Reading Congress Urges FDA to Complete Its Review of E-Cigarette Applications
Stakeholders’ Input Welcome: Virginia ABC to Assess Options for Regulating Liquid Nicotine in the Commonwealth
The Virginia ABC will assess a regulatory scheme for liquid nicotine, with the consultation of stakeholders, and issue a report and recommendations.
RJ Reynolds Sues California AG Disputing Applicability of Flavor Ban
On May 11, RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company, along with two convenience stores and the American Petroleum and Convenience Store Association, sued the California attorney general and district attorney for Fresno County in their official capacities, seeking declaratory relief that these California officials misinterpreted and misapplied California’s ban on flavored tobacco products and incorrectly concluded that RJ Reynolds’ new products violate this ban.
Continue Reading RJ Reynolds Sues California AG Disputing Applicability of Flavor Ban
Inside FDA’s Response to Reagan-Udall Foundation Report: Spotlight on the Science and Application Review Task Force
This is the second post in our multipart series evaluating the Food and Drug Administration’s response to the Regan-Udall Foundation report on the operations of the Center for Tobacco Products. If you missed our first post, check it out here.
There is a common refrain that appears throughout the Reagan-Udall Foundation report on the Center for Tobacco Products (CTP) at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) — lack of transparency. The report found that stakeholders generally perceived premarket tobacco product applications (PMTAs) — required for all electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) on the market — as “ineffective and problematic” due in part to a “lack of adequate guidance and transparency regarding CTP expectations,” as well as a “lack of clarity regarding review standards.”
Hidden FDA Report Raises Questions About Its Approach to Public Records and Premarket Tobacco Review
FDA’s approach to a premarket tobacco product application (PMTA) raises new questions about whether its marketing denial order was arbitrary and capricious and whether the deliberative-process exemption justifies its withholding of related records. The Agency’s approach is partially documented in a memorandum that FDA disclosed in response to a Freedom of Information Act request, and there is pending litigation over other records that FDA continues to withhold.
Oregon Bill Proposes to Replace Escrow Deposit System With “Equity Assessment” for Certain Tobacco Product Manufacturers
The Oregon Legislature’s 2023 regular session kicked off with a bang for the tobacco industry when House Bill 2128 (HB2128) was introduced at the request of Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum who also happens to the be president-elect of the National Association of Attorneys General. If passed, HB2128 would replace Oregon’s escrow deposit system, applicable to tobacco product manufacturers that are nonparticipating manufacturers (NPMs) under the Master Settlement Agreement (MSA), with an equity assessment. While HB2128 was only recently introduced and has a number of hurdles to overcome before it becomes law, we are not aware of any other state that has made a similar proposal to retroactively change escrow deposit systems for NPMs. Thus, HB2128 is worth monitoring, not only for its potential impact to Oregon NPMs, but also to see whether similar legislation will be introduced in other states.
Parsing the New Wave of State Tobacco Settlement Suits
Published in Law360 on January 10, 2023. © Copyright 2022, Portfolio Media, Inc., publisher of Law360. Reprinted here with permission.
In late November, the New Mexico attorney general announced a lawsuit[1] in the Santa Fe County First Judicial District Court against Philip Morris USA Inc., R.J. Reynolds and other signatories to the tobacco master settlement agreement alleging their violation of the MSA and various state and common laws due to their withholding of payments to the state.
Continue Reading Parsing the New Wave of State Tobacco Settlement Suits
FDA Implements More Aggressive Approach to Enforcement of ENDS Premarket Requirements
In October 2022, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced that the Department of Justice (DOJ), on its behalf, filed complaints against six electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) companies in federal district courts, seeking permanent injunctions. These cases are important because they mark the first time the FDA has litigated against companies to enforce