<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Abnormal Use &#187; District of Columbia</title>
	<atom:link href="http://abnormaluse.com/tag/district-of-columbia/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://abnormaluse.com</link>
	<description>Brought to you by the attorneys at Gallivan, White and Boyd</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Jun 2013 13:49:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>E-Cigarettes: Drug-device combo or mere tobacco product?</title>
		<link>http://abnormaluse.com/2010/01/e-cigarettes-drug-device-combo-or-mere.html</link>
		<comments>http://abnormaluse.com/2010/01/e-cigarettes-drug-device-combo-or-mere.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dan Eller</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[District of Columbia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FDA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tobacco]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://abnormaluse.com/2010/01/e-cigarettes-drug-device-combo-or-mere-tobacco-product.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Since the fall of 2008, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has routinely refused to allow the importation of electronic cigarettes, or &#8220;e-cigarettes,&#8221; into this country. A recent opinion might require a change of that policy. In Smoking Everywhere, Inc. v. U.S. Food &#38; Drug Admin, No. 09-771(RJL), 2010 WL 129667 (D.D.C. Jan. 14, 2010), [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Since the fall of 2008, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has routinely refused to allow the importation of electronic cigarettes, or &#8220;e-cigarettes,&#8221; into this country. A recent opinion might require a change of that policy. In <i>Smoking Everywhere, Inc. v. U.S. Food &amp; Drug Admin,</i> No. 09-771(<span id="SPELLING_ERROR_0"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0">RJL</span></span>), 2010 <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_1"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1">WL</span></span> 129667 (D.D.C. Jan. 14, 2010), the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted the Plaintiffs&#8217; request for a preliminary <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_2">injunction</span> prohibiting the FDA from denying <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_3">entry</span> of e-cigarettes into the United States and from regulating e-cigarettes as a drug-device combination.</p>
<p>The plaintiffs in this action, Smoking Everywhere, Inc. and <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_4"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2">Sottera</span></span>, Inc., are <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_5">importers</span> and distributors of e-cigarettes. These products are designed &#8220;to replicate the adult experience of smoking without combustion or the use of cancerous by-products.&#8221;<i>Id</i>. at *1. They import their products from manufacturers located overseas. However, their shipments were denied entry into the United States by the FDA on the basis that the shipments &#8220;appear to be adulterated, <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_6"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3">misbranded</span></span> or otherwise in violation&#8221; of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, 21 U.S.C. § 301 <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_4">et</span> seq. <i>Id. at *2.</i></p>
<p>Due to the action&#8217;s procedural posture, the court analyzed the likelihood of the Plaintiffs&#8217; success on the merits, whether the Plaintiffs would suffer irreparable injury were an injunction not to be granted, and whether an <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_8">injunction</span> would further the <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_9"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_5">public&#8217;s</span></span> interest. <i>Id. at *3. </i>The court&#8217;s analysis required it to consider federal tobacco legislation, the <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_10"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_6">FDCA</span></span>, and the landmark decision of <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/98-1152.ZS.html"><i>U.S. Food and Drug Admin. v. Brown &amp; Williamson Tobacco Corp.</i></a>, 529 U.S. 120 (2000), wherein the Supreme Court held that tobacco products were not subject to FDA regulation as a drug or device.</p>
<p>The <i>Smoking Everywhere</i> court rejected the <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_11"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_7">FDA&#8217;s</span></span> arguments that the term &#8220;tobacco product&#8221; should be narrowly defined and that e-cigarettes were drug-device combinations. The court stressed that due to the marketing of the e-cigarettes &#8220;for customary recreational use, those products (just like traditional cigarettes) are properly excluded from the meaning of drug or device under the <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_12"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_8">FDCA</span></span>.&#8221; <i>Id. at *8.</i> As such, the court determined that the Plaintiffs were &#8220;substantially likely to succeed on <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_13">their</span> claim that the FDA cannot regulate and thereby exclude their electronic cigarettes from the United States on the basis that those products are an unapproved drug-device combination under the <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_14"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_9">FDCA</span></span>.&#8221; <i>Id.</i> The court also determined that the Plaintiffs had suffered irreparable harm due to the <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_15"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_10">FDA&#8217;s</span></span> refusal to allow the importation of their e-cigarette shipments. <i>Id. at *10. </i>In the court&#8217;s final analysis, the factors weighed in the Plaintiffs&#8217; favor, and therefore, the court granted the Plaintiffs&#8217; request for an order enjoining the FDA from refusing admission into the U.S. e-cigarettes on the basis that such products are unapproved drugs, devices or drug-device combinations under the <span id="SPELLING_ERROR_16"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_11">FDCA</span></span>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://abnormaluse.com/2010/01/e-cigarettes-drug-device-combo-or-mere.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
