Uncategorized

Subscribe to Uncategorized via RSS

On June 20, the Supreme Court concluded that marketing denial orders (MDOs) issued by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) can be challenged not only by the applicants (typically, the manufacturer or importer of the products), but also by retailers who would sell such products. As a result, more challenges to MDOs are likely to be brought before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, where litigants have generally had greater success to date in challenging MDOs relative to other appellate courts.

We previously wrote about this case last January, here and here, when Iowans for Alternatives to Smoking & Tobacco, Inc., Global Source Distribution, LLC, and others filed a complaint and motion for a preliminary injunction in federal district court against the Iowa Department of Revenue (the Department), challenging Iowa House File 2677 (HF 2677), a law imposing certification and directory requirements on vapor products sold in Iowa. On May 2, the court granted plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction and enjoined the Department from implementing and enforcing HF 2677’s vapor product directory provisions. The court held that the Department could, however, continue to enforce the provisions of HF 2677 requiring nonresident vapor product manufacturers not registered to do business in the state as a foreign corporation or business entity to appoint and continually engage an agent for service of process. The parties have a status conference before the court scheduled for May 29.

Over the last decade, hundreds of localities have passed ordinances restricting or prohibiting the sale of some or all types of tobacco products. Some of these ordinances have been challenged in court, but, in most cases, the localities have prevailed. In this case, a group of retailers (the Retailers), sued Multnomah County, Oregon (the County) in January 2023 alleging that the County’s flavored tobacco product ban was unlawful. Earlier this month, consistent with the overall trend, the court ruled against the Retailers and upheld the County’s flavor ban.

FDA recently announced the issuance of warnings letters to 189 retailers found to be selling unauthorized tobacco products, specifically Elf Bars and Esco Bars.

As a result of the passage of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (TCA), new tobacco products may only be sold in the U.S. if they have received marketing authorization from FDA. Products with pending premarket applications are currently subject to FDA’s enforcement discretion. According to FDA, Elf Bars and Esco Bars have neither received marketing authorization, nor have applications pending with the agency, and therefore cannot be lawfully sold.

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).