Photo of Bryan Haynes

Bryan Haynes

Subscribe to Bryan Haynes's Posts

Bryan serves clients by developing and implementing creative solutions for complex issues. Focusing in tobacco industry regulatory compliance and enforcement matters, Bryan efficiently assists clients in complying with regulatory obligations and managing risk, consistent with clients' business objectives.

Contact:Read more about Bryan Haynes

On March 9, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released a draft guidance document describing the agency’s perspective on premarket tobacco product applications (PMTAs) for flavored electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS). 

The document, titled “Flavored Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS) Premarket Applications – Considerations Related to Youth Risk: Draft Guidance for Industry,” available here (Draft Guidance), reflects FDA doubling down on its heightened expectations for flavored ENDS PMTAs.

Bryan Haynes and Agustin Rodriguez of Troutman Pepper Locke Tobacco + Nicotine team will attend the Total Product Expo show in Las Vegas, March 31 to April 2.

This show is a great opportunity for manufacturers, importers, distributors, retailers and other stakeholders in the nicotine and tobacco industry to connect…

The North Carolina Court of Appeals recently issued a decision strengthening the “sealed container” defense available to non‑manufacturing sellers in products liability cases. In Weaver v. AMV Holdings LLC, the court found in favor of a vape retailer and distributor after a lithium‑ion battery malfunctioned in a customer’s pocket, causing serious burns. For retailers and distributors — particularly those dealing with lithium‑ion batteries — this decision underscores the continued viability of sealed container defenses.

California recently finalized changes to its Proposition 65 (Prop 65) warning rules that included significant changes to short-form warning statements for product labels. These changes directly affect nicotine‑containing products — including e‑cigarettes, e‑liquids, oral nicotine products, and other consumer goods that can expose consumers to nicotine.

We recently covered this case here, in which a small manufacturer and retailer sued the Virginia attorney general (AG) and tax commissioner in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, seeking to enjoin enforcement of the vapor product directory law. See Nova Distro, Inc., et al. v. Miyares et al., No. 3:25-cv-857 (E.D.V.A.). There, we also noted another ongoing case challenging a similar law in North Carolina, for which oral argument is scheduled before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit on January 29, 2026. See Vapor Technology Association, et al. v. Wooten et al., No. 25-1745 (4th Cir.).

In this episode of our special 12 Days of Regulatory Insights podcast series, Chris Carlson is joined by colleagues Bryan Haynes and Agustin Rodriguez — members of our Tobacco and Nicotine Practice and RISE Practice Group — to review the year’s most consequential developments in the tobacco and nicotine space and what they mean heading into 2026.

Earlier this fall, a small manufacturer and retailer (the Plaintiffs) sued Virginia Attorney General (AG) Jason Miyares and Tax Commissioner James Alex (the Defendants) in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, seeking to enjoin their enforcement of Virginia’s vapor product directory regime, Va. Code Ann. §§ 59.1-293.14 to .21, which the General Assembly passed in 2024.

This litigation is a recent addition to the growing list of legal challenges to state vapor product directories around the country—and the second to arise in federal courts within the Fourth Circuit. Like these other ongoing challenges, the Virginia case raises the issue of whether these state directory regimes are preempted under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA).

On October 27, FDA appealed a decision of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia that vacated the agency’s 2020 rule requiring graphic health warnings on cigarette packaging and advertisements.  This appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals to the Eleventh Circuit, along with a separate challenge pending before the Fifth Circuit, may determine whether FDA’s second attempt to impose graphic health warnings on cigarettes will be successful.[1]