USA v PHILIP MORRIS, et. al.: PUBLIC HEALTH INTERVENORS’ MEMORANDUM OF POSITION AS REQUIRED BY ORDER #65-REMAND, Jan 17, 2017

January 17, 2017 7:34 pm by Gene Borio

The PDF is Here

EXCERPT:

Particularly in light of the Tobacco Industry’s recent acknowledgement to this Court that, as a result of the D.C. Circuit’s November 1, 2016 ruling on the relevant issue, “it is now clear that Defendant R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company is required to publish three sets of corrective statements on television – one on behalf of Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation, one on behalf of itself, and one on behalf of Lorillard Tobacco Company,” Docket Entry 6202, it is the Public Health Intervenors’ position that there are no outstanding issues with regard to this particular matter that this Court needs to decide.

The only remaining issues in this case are the Tobacco Companies’ most recent challenge to the preamble language, currently pending before the D.C. Circuit and scheduled for oral argument on February 14, 2017, and the point-of-sale issue pending before this Court.

. . .

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Katherine A. Meyer

(D.C. Bar No. 244301)

Meyer Glitzenstein & Eubanks, LLP

END EXCERPT

(more…)

USA v PHILIP MORRIS, et. al.: UNITED STATES’ MEMORANDUM IN RESPONSE TO ORDER #65-REMAND, Jan 17, 2017

January 17, 2017 7:28 pm by Gene Borio

The PDF is Here

EXCERPT:

This Court directed the parties to submit their positions by January 17, 2017, and set a status conference for January 31, 2017. . .

The United States agrees with the tobacco companies’ explanation about why the Court of Appeals’ recent decision raises no issues for this Court or the parties to address at the January 31 status conference.

But contrary to the tobacco companies’ suggestion that the status conference be canceled, the United States respectfully suggests that the opportunity be used to address the portion of the D.C. Circuit’s earlier remand, from the merits appeal, concerning the point-of-sale media channel for disseminating the corrective statements.

END EXCERPT

(more…)

USA v PHILIP MORRIS, et. al.: MANUFACTURERS’ MEMORANDUM OF POSITION, Jan 10, 2017

January 12, 2017 12:23 am by Gene Borio

The PDF is Here

EXCERPT:

The appellate mandate released on December 29, 2016 arose from Defendant R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company’s appeal from Order #56-Remand, which denied Reynolds’ motion for relief from this Court’s requirement that Reynolds publish the corrective statements on television on behalf of former-Defendant Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation. Accordingly, it is now clear that Defendant R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company is required to publish three sets of corrective statements on television—one on behalf of Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation, one on behalf of itself, and one on behalf of Lorillard Tobacco Company. Following resolution of that appeal, the Manufacturers are not aware of any outstanding issues regarding the number of television spots that Reynolds is required to publish.

In addition to the foregoing, the Manufacturers have separately appealed from Order #62-Remand, which established revised text for the corrective statements and entered a superseding consent order on implementing the corrective-statements remedy, respectfully. In this appeal, the Manufacturers argue, among other things, that the text of the preambles as set forth in Order #62-Remand is contrary to RICO and the First Amendment. Briefing in that appeal concluded in December, and oral argument is scheduled for February 14, 2017.

In light of the foregoing, and absent a material change in circumstances, the Manufacturers respectfully suggest that there is no need for a Status Conference until the resolution of the appeal in Case Nos. 16-5101 & 16-5127.

END EXCERPT

(more…)

DOCKET for USA v. PHILIP MORRIS USA, et al, Dec 27, 2016-Jan 10, 2017

January 3, 2017 5:47 pm by Gene Borio

EXCERPT:

01/03/2017 Set/Reset Deadlines/Hearings: Memoranda of position due by 1/17/2017. Status Conference set for 1/31/2017 at 10:30 AM in Courtroom 26A before Judge Gladys Kessler. (CL) (Entered: 01/03/2017)

END EXCERPT

(more…)

USA v PHILIP MORRIS, et. al.: ORDER #65-Remand, Jan 3, 2017

January 3, 2017 5:37 pm by Gene Borio

The PDF is Here

EXCERPT:

On December 29, 2016, the Court of Appeals released the Mandate in this case.

WHEREFORE, it is this 3rd day of January, 2017, hereby

ORDERED, that counsel are to submit, no later than January 17,2017, Memoranda as to what the positions are of the Parties concerned; and it is further

ORDERED, that the Parties are to appear for a Status Conference on January 31, 2017, at 10:30 a.m.

END EXCERPT

(more…)

USA v PHILIP MORRIS, et. al. Appeal: MANDATE ISSUED to Clerk, U.S. District Court, Dec 29, 2016

December 30, 2016 10:54 am by Gene Borio

The PDF is Here

EXCERPT:

M A N D A T E

In accordance with the judgment of November 1, 2016, and pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 41, this constitutes the formal mandate of this court.

END EXCERPT

(more…)

FORSYTH v MPAA: PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF APPEAL, Dec 29, 2016

December 30, 2016 1:39 am by Gene Borio

The PDF is Here

EXCERPT:

Notice is hereby given that Plaintiff Timothy Forsyth appeals to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit from the Judgment entered in the above-captioned action on December 1, 2016, Dkt. No. 65 (attached hereto as Exhibit A), including the Order Granting Motion to Dismiss, dated November 10, 2016, Dkt. No. 59 (attached hereto as Exhibit B).

END EXCERPT

(more…)

CEI v DOT: RESPONDENT FINAL BRIEF, Dec 28, 2016

December 28, 2016 5:28 pm by Gene Borio

The PDF is Here

EXCERPT:

The Secretary of Transportation (the Secretary) reasonably concluded that e-cigarettes fall within the statutory ban on “smoking“ in aircraft.

. . .

The Secretary‘s regulatory definition, which includes e-cigarettes within the meaning of “smoking,“ furthers the statutory purpose of preserving cabin air quality, avoiding passenger and crew discomfort, and reducing crewmembers‘ exposure to potential health hazards.

. . .

This Court should uphold the Secretary‘s reasonable decision to protect passengers and crewmembers from secondhand exposure to e-cigarette aerosol. Prohibiting e-cigarettes on aircraft fits squarely within the text and purposes of the statutory ban on “smoking“ in aircraft and ensures that passengers receive “safe and adequate“ air transportation.

. . .

Finally, four new studies “expanded on and confirmed“ the possibility that ecigarettes contain respiratory irritants and chemicals that may cause adverse health effects.

. . .

The final rule is a rational exercise of the Department‘s authority to ensure “safe and adequate“ service by protecting passengers from secondhand exposure to e-cigarette aerosol.

END EXCERPT

(more…)

USA v PHILIP MORRIS, et. al. Appeal: APPELLANTS’ REPLY BRIEF, Dec 22, 2016

December 22, 2016 9:21 pm by Gene Borio

The PDF is Here

EXCERPT:

This Court rejected this gamesmanship in the Corrective Statements Decision when it held that Defendants correctly objected to publishing the original preambles. It should do so again here because the district court’s revised preambles suffer from the same flaws as the preambles previously invalidated by this Court: The revised preambles unambiguously convey that Defendants previously withheld “the truth” and are providing it now only because they are being “ordered” by a “Federal Court” to do so. This backward-looking, self-condemnatory message—that “Here, finally, is the truth” that Defendants withheld and a “Court” has “ordered” them to disseminate—is not compatible with RICO or the First Amendment.

END EXCERPT

(more…)

FORSYTH v MPAA: STIPULATION AND ORDER, Dec 22, 2016

December 22, 2016 8:53 pm by Gene Borio

The PDF is Here

EXCERPT:

Counsel for Plaintiff and Defendant NATO met and conferred by telephone and email regarding the briefing schedule and hearing date and agreed that Plaintiff’s response to Defendant NATO’s motion for attorneys’ fees shall be due January 24, 2017 and Defendant NATO’s reply in support of the motion for attorneys’ fees shall be due February 2, 2017. The additional time is necessary based on counsel’s work and vacation schedules. Upon reviewing the Court’s calendar, the parties also agreed that February 16, 2017, was the most mutually convenient available hearing date.

. . .

THE COURT FINDS GOOD CAUSE EXISTS FOR THE PARTIES’ STIPULATION AND ON THAT BASIS THE FOREGOING STIPULATION IS APPROVED AND IS SO ORDERED.

END EXCERPT

(more…)