On December 18th, 17 states and the manufacturer-signatories to the Master Settlement Agreement announced a settlement of the manufacturers’ claims that the states failed to satisfy their obligations to “diligently enforce” non-signatories’ escrow requirements.
Significant Cases
Comparing Your Product to Recognized Brands
R.J. Reynolds recently filed a federal lawsuit accusing an e-cigarette merchant of trademark infringement. R.J. Reynolds accused the company of unfair competition and dilution under the Lanham Act based on the company’s alleged use of the Camel and Winston cigarette brand names to describe the company’s e-cigarettes. R.J. Reynolds claimed that the competitor advertised “Winston” and “Camell” flavors on its website.
Court Dismisses Philip Morris Lawsuit Challenging Tobacco Buyout Calculations
We previously reported that in February 2011, Philip Morris filed a federal lawsuit challenging the United States Department of Agriculture’s (“USDA”) calculation of tobacco buyout assessments under the Fair and Equitable Tobacco Reform Act of 2004 (“FETRA”) for fiscal years 2011-2014. The lawsuit challenged a USDA regulation providing that buyout assessments for large cigars for fiscal years 2011-2014 would be calculated using the federal excise tax rate (“FET”) in effect in fiscal year 2005, rather than the new increased FET rates that took effect under the Children’s Heath Insurance Program Reauthorization Act (“CHIPRA”) in April 2009.
Star Scientific’s Settlement with R. J. Reynolds Leaves Star Free to Enforce Tobacco Curing Patents
Star Scientific and R. J. Reynolds have settled their long-running litigation over Star’s patents covering a curing process that prevents the formation of some cancer-causing chemicals in tobacco. The settlement leaves in place a federal appeals court decision that Star’s patents are not invalid and so removes a potential cloud over the validity of the patents. Star thus can now seek to enforce the patent against other tobacco manufacturers whom it believes are using its patented curing process.
Troutman Sanders Tobacco Practice Quoted on Cigarette Warning Label Decision
Troutman Sanders Tobacco practice partner Bryan Haynes was quoted in a recent article in Law360 regarding the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision rejecting FDA’s graphic warning label requirements. The article can be found here or by request at tobacco@troutmansanders.com.
For questions and/or comments, please contact Bryan Haynes,
Appeals Court Ruling on Cigarette Graphic Warnings Sets Up Potential Challenge before US Supreme Court
The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia today struck down the FDA graphic warning label requirement, which sets up a potential challenge before the US Supreme Court on this subject. This result is opposite to an earlier ruling from another circuit, thus providing an opening for further appeal to the US Supreme Court.
Federal Court Allows TPSAC Challenge to Proceed
Earlier this month, a federal court in the District of Columbia allowed a lawsuit, filed by Lorillard Tobacco and R.J. Reynolds and challenging the composition of FDA’s Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory Committee (TPSAC), to proceed.
Big Tobacco Loses Appeal in Racketeering Case
A federal appellate court recently rejected the tobacco industry’s argument that restrictions imposed as part of a 2006 judgment should be set aside because Congress, in 2009, passed a law that imposed other restrictions on the industry and gave the Food & Drug Administration (“FDA”) the primary authority to regulate tobacco products.
Manufacturers and Retailers Challenge Haverstraw, New York’s Ordinance Banning Displays of Tobacco Products and Pricing Information in Retail Outlets
On June 26, 2012, the New York Association of Convenience Stores and major tobacco manufacturers, including Phillip Morris, R.J. Reynolds and Lorillard, filed suit against the Village of Haverstraw, New York in federal district court regarding the Village’s recent ordinance banning the display of tobacco products and pricing information in retail outlets.
Ruyan Patent Litigation as Reason to Consider Patent Protection
The concept of electronic cigarettes is not new. Likewise, the idea of obtaining a patent on e-cigarettes is not new – Herbert A. Gilbert obtained a patent on an electronic cigarette in 1963. But the popularity of e-cigarettes has grown significantly over the past decade, as has the importance of obtaining patent protection for a business’s intellectual property.