Photo of Nick Ramos

Nicholas (Nick) Ramos draws on years of military leadership, project management, and legal experience to help clients solve difficult business problems from a legal perspective. He assists clients in navigating regulatory compliance issues, complex enforcement actions, and licensing that arise under both state and federal law.

Earlier this month, the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) provided public notice that it plans to amend regulations governing Proposition 65 (Prop 65) short-form warning labels. OEHHA offered to hold a public hearing, upon request, which would need to be received by February 22, 2021 and it requested public comments on the proposed amendments by March 8, 2021. While these changes only apply to products sold in California, many companies take a broad approach to applying these labels to many, if not all, of their products sold in the US because of the size of the California tobacco consumer market. Therefore, these changes could have far reaching effects for any tobacco-related businesses that sell tobacco products in California or broadly use Prop 65 warnings.
Continue Reading California Considers Modifying Prop 65 Warning Requirements

In November 2019, we reported that the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) issued an interim final rule establishing a domestic hemp production program that was intended to go into effect for two years before being replaced by a final rule. On January 19, 2021, USDA published that final rule after considering nearly 5,900 public comments and incorporating lessons learned from the 2020 growing season. While the final rule focuses on industrial hemp production, not processed hemp products (such as CBD derived from hemp), it may be particularly important to those who wish to exercise due diligence on their agricultural supply chains. It will be effective March 22, 2021, unless the new Administration changes the timeline.
Continue Reading USDA Finalizes Rule to Establish Domestic Hemp Production Program

As many in the tobacco industry know, there is a growing trend among state and local governments to prohibit or restrict the sale of flavored tobacco or nicotine products. Some governments are focusing on narrow subsets of flavored tobacco or nicotine products, like vapor products or electronic cigarettes, while others are intent on a broader prohibition or restriction that might include more traditional products like cigarettes, cigars, or smokeless tobacco. At the state level, Attorneys General have been at the forefront of the ensuing legal battles over this type of legislation.
Continue Reading California Attorney General Continues Fight to Ban Flavored Tobacco Products

By Troutman Pepper Tobacco Practice, Bryan Haynes, Agustin Rodriguez, & Nicholas Ramos on October 22, 2020

Online businesses selling electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) to consumers must contend with a “patchwork quilt” of state laws. This patchwork of laws creates significant regulatory uncertainty and risk for businesses selling online in this space. There are many

Relying on the regulatory and legal uncertainty surrounding cannabidiol (CBD), Food and Drug Administration statements and state laws, several class actions have been filed since late 2019 against companies selling CBD products, a number of which have been filed in California federal courts. In at least two cases, courts have adopted defendants’ requests to delay the cases while the FDA continues to study CBD and how it should be federally regulated. These cases could represent a developing “wait and see” approach by federal courts dealing with CBD class action lawsuits.
Continue Reading Federal Courts May Be Trending Toward Delaying CBD Consumer Class Action Lawsuits