DOCSLIB.ORG

Castano V. American Tobacco Co., 84 F.3D 734 (1996) 64 USLW 2753, 34 Fed.R.Serv.3D 1167

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Castano V. American Tobacco Co., 84 F.3D 734 (1996) 64 USLW 2753, 34 Fed.R.Serv.3D 1167 Castano v. American Tobacco Co., 84 F.3d 734 (1996) 64 USLW 2753, 34 Fed.R.Serv.3d 1167 105 Cases that cite this headnote KeyCite Yellow Flag - Negative Treatment Rejected by Arch v. American Tobacco Co., Inc., E.D.Pa., June 3, 1997 [2] Federal Civil Procedure 84 F.3d 734 Discretion of Court United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. Federal district court's decision to certify class is within its broad discretion, but Dianne CASTANO, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, that discretion must be exercised within v. framework of rule governing class actions. The AMERICAN TOBACCO COMPANY, Fed.Rules Civ.Proc.Rule 23, 28 U.S.C.A. et al., Defendants-Appellants. 42 Cases that cite this headnote No. 95-30725. | [3] Federal Civil Procedure May 23, 1996. Evidence; Pleadings and Supplementary Material Synopsis Motion for class certification was brought in action Party seeking class certification bears burden which had been brought on behalf of all smokers and of proof. Fed.Rules Civ.Proc.Rule 23, 28 nicotine dependent persons and their families against U.S.C.A. tobacco companies. The United States District Court 36 Cases that cite this headnote for the Eastern District of Louisiana, Okla Jones, II, J., 160 F.R.D. 544, certified class consisting of all nicotine dependent persons who have smoked and purchased [4] Federal Civil Procedure cigarettes manufactured by tobacco companies, and Consumers, Purchasers, Borrowers, and appeal was taken. The Court of Appeals, Jerry E. Debtors Smith, Circuit Judge, held that multistate class would be Multistate class consisting of nicotine decertified because federal district court failed to consider dependent persons who have purchased how variations in state law would affect predominance and smoked cigarettes manufactured by and superiority, district court's predominance inquiry did tobacco companies would be decertified not include consideration of how trial on the merits because federal district court failed to would be conducted, and class independently failed the consider how variations in state law would superiority requirement. affect predominance and superiority, district court's predominance inquiry did not include Reversed and remanded with instructions. consideration of how trial on the merits would be conducted, and class independently failed to satisfy superiority requirement. Fed.Rules Civ.Proc.Rule 23, 28 U.S.C.A. West Headnotes (11) 124 Cases that cite this headnote [1] Federal Civil Procedure In General; Certification in General [5] Federal Civil Procedure Federal district court must conduct rigorous Hearing and Determination; analysis of the prerequisites of numerosity, Decertification; Effect commonality, typicality, and adequacy of Although rule governing class actions requires representation before certifying a class. that class be certified as soon as practicable Fed.Rules Civ.Proc.Rule 23, 28 U.S.C.A. and allows court to certify a conditional class, it does not follow that the rule's requirements are lessened when the class is © 2018 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 1 Castano v. American Tobacco Co., 84 F.3d 734 (1996) 64 USLW 2753, 34 Fed.R.Serv.3d 1167 conditional. Fed.Rules Civ.Proc.Rule 23(c) Given plaintiffs' burden of establishing (1), 28 U.S.C.A. class certification, court cannot rely on assurances of counsel that any problems 46 Cases that cite this headnote with predominance or superiority can be overcome. Fed.Rules Civ.Proc.Rule 23, 28 [6] Federal Civil Procedure U.S.C.A. Common Interest in Subject Matter, 94 Cases that cite this headnote Questions and Relief; Damages Issues In multistate class action, variations in state law may swamp any common [10] Federal Civil Procedure issues and defeat predominance. Fed.Rules Evidence; Pleadings and Supplementary Civ.Proc.Rule 23, 28 U.S.C.A. Material Federal district court may look past the 162 Cases that cite this headnote pleadings to determine whether requirements of rule governing class actions have been met; [7] Federal Civil Procedure going beyond the pleadings is necessary as Superiority, Manageability, and Need in court must understand the claims, defenses, General relevant facts, and applicable substantive law in order to make meaningful determination Federal Civil Procedure of class certification issues. Fed.Rules Common Interest in Subject Matter, Civ.Proc.Rule 23, 28 U.S.C.A. Questions and Relief; Damages Issues Federal district court's duty to determine 285 Cases that cite this headnote whether plaintiff has borne its burden on class certification requires that court consider [11] Jury variations in state law when class action Re-Examination or Other Review of involves multiple jurisdictions; court must Questions of Fact Tried by Jury consider how variations in state law affect predominance and superiority. Fed.Rules Seventh Amendment entitles parties to have Civ.Proc.Rule 23, 28 U.S.C.A. fact issues decided by one jury and prohibits second jury from reexamining those facts 282 Cases that cite this headnote and issues and thus, the Constitution allows bifurcation of issues that are so separable that second jury will not be called upon [8] Federal Civil Procedure to reconsider findings of fact by the first. Hearing and Determination; U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 7. Decertification; Effect To make findings required to certify a 16 Cases that cite this headnote class action, one must initially identify the substantive law issues which will control outcome of the litigation. Fed.Rules Civ.Proc.Rule 23(b)(3), 28 U.S.C.A. Attorneys and Law Firms 46 Cases that cite this headnote *735 Bettye A. Barrios, Johnson, Johnson, Barrios & Yacoubian, New Orleans, LA, Melvin M. Belli, San [9] Federal Civil Procedure Francisco, CA, Joseph M. Bruno, Bruno & Bruno, New Evidence; Pleadings and Supplementary Orleans, LA, Kenneth M. Carter, New Orleans, LA, Material Bruce C. Dean, New Orleans, LA, Wendell H. Gauthier, Daniel G. Abel, Dana Kim Cormier, Julie B. Beiser, Gauthier & Murphy, Metairie, LA, Christopher M. © 2018 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 2 Castano v. American Tobacco Co., 84 F.3d 734 (1996) 64 USLW 2753, 34 Fed.R.Serv.3d 1167 Guidroz, New Orleans, LA, John B. Krentel, Metairie, & Ellis, Washington, DC, Paul R. Duke, Covington & LA, Walter J. Leger, Jr., New Orleans, LA, Arthur R. Burling, Washington, DC, Thomas E. Silfen, Laura Jean Miller, Cambridge, MA, Ronald L. Motley, Charleston, Hines, Arnold & Porter, Washington, DC, Robert C. SC, Stephen B. Murray, New Orleans, LA, Charles W. Heim, Dechert, Price & Rhoads, Philadelphia, PA, for all Patrick, Jr., Charleston, SC, Robert Leland Redfearn, defendants-appellants. Jr., New Orleans, LA, Michael X. St. Martin, Houma, LA, Scott McCullen Baldwin, John Browning Baldwin, Joy Goldberg Braun, Robert E. Winn, Sessions & Baldwin & Baldwin, Marshall, TX, Calvin Clifford Fishman, New Orleans, LA, *736 Bruce G. Sheffler, Fayard, Jr., Denham Springs, LA, Robert D. Greenbaum, Thomas E. Bezanson, Mary T. Yelenick, Chadbourne & Philadelphia, PA, George Febiger Riess, New Orleans, Parke, New York City, for American Tobacco Co. and LA, Peter J. Butler, Jr., Deutsch, Kerrigan & Stiles, American Brands Incorporated. New Orleans, LA, Andrew W. Hutton, Wichita, KS, Carmelite M. Bertaut, Charles L. Chassaignac, Peter A. Wells Talbot Watson, Lake Charles, LA, Richard M. Feringa, Jr., Chaffe, McCall, Phillips, Toler & Sarpy, Heimann, Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann, Bernstein, San New Orleans, LA, for Lorillard, Inc., R.J. Reynolds Francisco, CA, Ralph Irving Knowles, Jr., Atlanta, GA, Tobacco Co., Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., Batus Arnold Levin, Levin, Fishbein, Sedran and Berman, Holdings, Inc., and Batus, Inc. Philadelphia, PA, John R. Climaco, Climaco, Climaco, Seminatore, Lefkowitz and Garofoli, Cleveland, OH, James Thomas Newsom, Shook, Hardy & Bacon, Kansas Jodi W. Flowers, Susan Nial, Ness, Motley, Loadholt, City, MO, for Lorillard, Inc., Phillip Morris, Inc., Brown Richardson & Poole, Charleston, SC, Russ M. Herman, & Williamson Tobacco Corp., Batus Holdings, Inc., Herman, Herman, Katz & Cotlar, New Orleans, LA, Batus, Inc., Loews Corp., Philip Morris Companies, Inc., Francis“ Brother” Hare, Jr., Hare, Wynn, Newell & and Lorrillard Tobacco Co. Newton, Birmingham, AL, Gayle L. Troutwine, Michael L. Williams, Williams and Troutwine, Portlant, OR, John Mason McCollam, Steven W. Copley, Gordon, John P. Kopesky, Sheller, Ludwig & Badey, Philadelphia, Arata, McCollam & Duplantis, New Orleans, LA, for PA, Stanley M. Chesley, Waite & Schneider, Cincinnati, Lorillard, Inc., Loews Corp., and Lorrillard Tobacco Co. OH, John P. Coale, Diane E. Cooley, Coale, Allen & Van Susteren, Washington, DC, Margaret Moses Branch, Gary R. Long, James A. Wilson, Shook, Hardy & Bacon, Branch Law Firm, Albuquerque, NM, Perry Weitz, New Kansas City, MO, for Lorillard, Inc., Phillip Morris, Inc., York City, Louie J. Roussel, III, Metairie, LA, Edwin Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., Batus Holdings, Rene Murray, Edwin R. Murray & Associates, New Inc., Batus, Inc., Loews Corp., Philip Morris Companies, Orleans, LA, Sherrill Patricia Hondorf, Waite, Schneider, Inc., and Lorrillard Tobacco Co. Bayless & Chesley, Cincinnati, OH, Elizabeth Joan Allen Rennie Purvis, Kansas City, MO, for Phillip Morris Cabraser, Steven E. Fineman, Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann Incorporated. & Barnstein, San Francisco, CA, Dianne M. Nast, Roda & Nast, Lancaster, PA, Richard Alan Daynard, Scott Edward Delacroix, Charles F. Gay, Jr., Thomas J. Northeastern University School of Law, Boston, MA, Wyllie,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Low-Nitrosamine Cigarettes Go on Sale
    Low-nitrosamine cigarettes go on sale ■ Star's Advance, which rette smoke. Advance cigarettes will also Star Scientific is the first tobacco com­ Dallas-Fort Worth. St.ax Scientific is t.aking contain reduced levels of such other toxins pany to sell low-nitrosamine cigarettes and a much different approach in marketing has lower levels of some as hydrogen cyanide, and their packaging the latest to market cigarettes that the Advance compared to RJR's marketing of will include detailed health warnings tak­ public might perceive as a safer smoking Eclipse. ' toxins, being test~marketed ing up the entire back of the cigarette alternative. Advance's two test markets are The c2mpany is making no health By Adrian Zawada packs. Richntond and Lexington, Ky. claims, admitting on its Advance cigarette JOURNAL REPORTER ''We have an obligation to make Advance R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. has invested packs that "there is not enough evidence St.ax Scientific Inc. began selling low­ available to adult tobacco consumers along more than $1 billion fu developing its available to know if Star's methods will nitrosamine cigarettes in selected Ken­ with infonnation about the comparable smokeless cigarette, Eclipse, and its failed actually lower your health risks." tucky and Virginia test markets yesterday toxic constituents of smoke," said Paul predecessor, Premier. RJR announced two weeks ago that com.; to attract smokers who want a cigarette Perito, the company's president and chair­ RJR's Eclipse heats tobacco instead of pany scientists found no reduction in the with less potential to cause cancer. man. "Star hopes that the start of its limit­ burning it, and the company says it might toxicity of low-nitrosamine tobacco when The cigarettes, called Advance, have 73 ed test market of Advance will serve as an present smokers with less risk of lung can­ exposing the smoke to animals and DNA percent less tobacco-specific ri.itrosamines incentive to the traditional tobacco indus­ cer, chronic bronchitis and emphysema.
    [Show full text]
  • Cigarette Minimum Retail Price List
    MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE FILING ENFORCEMENT BUREAU CIGARETTE AND TOBACCO EXCISE UNIT PRESUMPTIVE MINIMUM RETAIL PRICES EFFECTIVE July 26, 2021 The prices listed below are based on cigarettes delivered by the wholesaler and do not include the 6.25 percent sales tax. Brands of cigarettes held in current inventory may be sold at the new presumptive minimum prices for those brands. Changes and additions are bolded. Non-Chain Stores Chain Stores Retail Retail Brand (Alpha) Carton Pack Carton Pack 1839 $86.64 $8.66 $85.38 $8.54 1st Class $71.49 $7.15 $70.44 $7.04 Basic $122.21 $12.22 $120.41 $12.04 Benson & Hedges $136.55 $13.66 $134.54 $13.45 Benson & Hedges Green $115.28 $11.53 $113.59 $11.36 Benson & Hedges King (princess pk) $134.75 $13.48 $132.78 $13.28 Cambridge $124.78 $12.48 $122.94 $12.29 Camel All others $116.56 $11.66 $114.85 $11.49 Camel Regular - Non Filter $141.43 $14.14 $139.35 $13.94 Camel Turkish Blends $110.14 $11.01 $108.51 $10.85 Capri $141.43 $14.14 $139.35 $13.94 Carlton $141.43 $14.14 $139.35 $13.94 Checkers $71.54 $7.15 $70.49 $7.05 Chesterfield $96.53 $9.65 $95.10 $9.51 Commander $117.28 $11.73 $115.55 $11.56 Couture $72.23 $7.22 $71.16 $7.12 Crown $70.76 $7.08 $69.73 $6.97 Dave's $107.70 $10.77 $106.11 $10.61 Doral $127.10 $12.71 $125.23 $12.52 Dunhill $141.43 $14.14 $139.35 $13.94 Eagle 20's $88.31 $8.83 $87.01 $8.70 Eclipse $137.16 $13.72 $135.15 $13.52 Edgefield $73.41 $7.34 $72.34 $7.23 English Ovals $125.44 $12.54 $123.59 $12.36 Eve $109.30 $10.93 $107.70 $10.77 Export A $120.88 $12.09 $119.10 $11.91
    [Show full text]
  • BMW of North America, LLC NJ ""K"" Line America, Inc. VA 1199
    The plan sponsors listed below have at least one application for the Retiree Drug Subsidy (RDS) program in an "Approved" status for a plan year ending in 2010 as of February 4, 2011. The state listed for each sponsor is the state provided by the sponsor on the application for the subsidy. This state may, or may not, be where the majority of the plan sponsor's retirees reside or where the plan sponsor is headquartered. This list will be updated periodically. Plan Plan Sponsor Business Name Sponsor State : BMW of North America, LLC NJ ""K"" Line America, Inc. VA 1199 SEIU Greater New York Benefit Fund NY 1199 SEIU National Benefit Fund NY 3M Company MN 4th District IBEW Health Fund WV A-C RETIREES' VOLUNTARY BENFITS PLAN WI A. DUDA & SONS, INC. FL A. SCHULMAN, INC OH A. T. Massey Coal Company, Inc. VA A&E Television Networks NY AAA EAST PENN PA AARP DC ABB Inc. CT Abbott Laboratories IL Abbott Pharmaceuticals PR Ltd. PR Acadia Parish School Board LA Accenture LLP IL Accuride Corporation IN ACF Industries LLC MO ACGME IL Acton Health Insurance Trust MA Actuant Corporation WI Adirondack Central School NY Administrative Office of the Pennsylvania Courts PA Adventist Risk Management MD Advisory Services OH AEGON USA, Inc. IA AFL-CIO Health and Welfare Trust DC AFSCME DC AFSCME Council 31 IL afscme d.c. 47 health & welfare fund PA AFSCME District Council 33 Health and Welfare Plan PA AFTRA Health Fund NY AGC FLAT GLASS NORTH AMERICA INC TN Page 1 AGC-IUOE Local 701 Health & Welfare Trust Fund WA AGCO Corporation GA Agilent Technologies, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Directory of Fire Safe Certified Cigarette Brand Styles Updated 4/29/10
    Directory of Fire Safe Certified Cigarette Brand Styles Updated 4/29/10 Beginning August 1, 2008, only the cigarette brands and styles listed below are allowed to be imported, stamped and/or sold in the State of Alaska. Per AS 18.74, these brands must be marked as fire safe on the packaging. The brand styles listed below have been certified as fire safe by the State Fire Marshall, bear the "FSC" marking. There is an exception to these requirements. The new fire safe law allows for the sale of cigarettes that are not fire safe and do not have the "FSC" marking as long as they were stamped and in the State of Alaska before August 1, 2008 and found on the "Directory of MSA Compliant Cigarette & RYO Brands." Filter/ Non- Brand Style Length Circ. Filter Pkg. Descr. Manufacturer 1839 Full Flavor 82.7 24.60 Filter Hard Pack U.S. Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers, Inc. 1839 Full Flavor 97 24.60 Filter Hard Pack U.S. Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers, Inc. 1839 Full Flavor 83 24.60 Non-Filter Soft Pack U.S. Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers, Inc. 1839 Light 83 24.40 Filter Hard Pack U.S. Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers, Inc. 1839 Light 97 24.50 Filter Hard Pack U.S. Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers, Inc. 1839 Menthol 97 24.50 Filter Hard Pack U.S. Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers, Inc. 1839 Menthol 83 24.60 Filter Hard Pack U.S. Flue-Cured Tobacco Growers, Inc. 1839 Menthol Light 83 24.50 Filter Hard Pack U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1 of 15
    Updated September14, 2021– 9:00 p.m. Date of Next Known Updates/Changes: *Please print this page for your own records* If there are any questions regarding pricing of brands or brands not listed, contact Heather Lynch at (317) 691-4826 or [email protected]. EMAIL is preferred. For a list of licensed wholesalers to purchase cigarettes and other tobacco products from - click here. For information on which brands can be legally sold in Indiana and those that are, or are about to be delisted - click here. *** PLEASE sign up for GovDelivery with your EMAIL and subscribe to “Tobacco Industry” (as well as any other topic you are interested in) Future lists will be pushed to you every time it is updated. *** https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/INATC/subscriber/new RECENTLY Changed / Updated: 09/14/2021- Changes to LD Club and Tobaccoville 09/07/2021- Update to some ITG list prices and buydowns; Correction to Pall Mall buydown 09/02/2021- Change to Nasco SF pricing 08/30/2021- Changes to all Marlboro and some RJ pricing 08/18/2021- Change to Marlboro Temp. Buydown pricing 08/17/2021- PM List Price Increase and Temp buydown on all Marlboro 01/26/2021- PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO GOVDELIVERY EMAIL LIST TO RECEIVE UPDATED PRICING SHEET 6/26/2020- ***RETAILER UNDER 21 TOBACCO***(EFF. JULY 1) (on last page after delisting) Minimum Minimum Date of Wholesale Wholesale Cigarette Retail Retail Brand List Manufacturer Website Price NOT Price Brand Price Per Price Per Update Delivered Delivered Carton Pack Premier Mfg. / U.S. 1839 Flare-Cured Tobacco 7/15/2021 $42.76 $4.28 $44.00 $44.21 Growers Premier Mfg.
    [Show full text]
  • State of Vermont V. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No
    State of Vermont v. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. S1087-05 CnC (Pearson, J., Mar. 10, 2010) [The text of this Vermont trial court opinion is unofficial. It has been reformatted from the original. The accuracy of the text and the accompanying data included in the Vermont trial court opinion database is not guaranteed.] STATE OF VERMONT CHITTENDEN SUPERIOR COURT CHITTENDEN COUNTY, SS. DOCKET NO. S1087-05 CnC STATE OF VERMONT v. R. J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO CO. FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND INTERIM DECISION ON LIABILITY “. I’m so tired I’ll have another cigarette, and curse Sir Walter Raleigh, he was such a stupid get!” 1 In this action brought by the State of Vermont seeking to impose liability for allegedly deceptive advertising used by Defendant R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. (“RJRT” or “Reynolds”) for its non-traditional Eclipse cigarette, 2 Reynolds has conceded the pharmacological basis for the insomniac smoker’s lament: nicotine is a powerful addictive substance, and the cigarette is essentially a nicotine delivery device which the smoker uses to ingest the necessary amount of nicotine that the individual smoker craves. Indeed, that premise, which tobacco companies have known for decades, 3 was one of the principal reasons behind RJRT’s development and marketing of the Eclipse cigarette. Because Reynolds knew that smokers are addicted to nicotine and attempts to quit smoking are difficult at best and rarely successful on the 1 st (or 2 nd or 3 rd ) try without medical aids and other support and assistance; and because it also knew, and now fully acknowledges that cigarettes are an inherently dangerous product — which, even when used properly and as directed, will result in unnecessary disease, bodily injury and harm, and even death — it sought to develop, and market a cigarette product for smokers who were concerned about their health but unable to quit, which could potentially result in a reduced risk to that smoker of contracting one (or more) of the most common tobacco-related diseases.
    [Show full text]
  • History of Smoking Cessation Part 4 Innovations, Support for Smokers Seeking to Quit, and Back to the Future
    History of Smoking Cessation Part 4 Innovations, support for smokers seeking to quit, and back to the future... Panel 4 In 1996 The Agency for Health Care 1996 Clinical Practice Policy and Research (AHCPR) published the Smoking Cessation: Guidelines for Health Clinical Practice Guideline. Based on Care Providers the results of meta-analyses and expert opinion, the guideline Identifies interventions for primary care clinicians and smoking cessation providers. The Public Health Service facilitated updates in 2000 and 2008. 1998 Web-Based Cessation Support QuitNet (MeYou Health, formerly Healthways) offered the first members-based website for smokers. Other personalized stop-smoking sites followed, including BecomeAnEx ( Truth Initiative®), Freedom from Smoking Plus (American Lung Association), Quit for Life (American Cancer Society) and others. For most sites, users register using a brief assessment of tobacco use. Most sites offer tools like quit guides, quit calendars, savings calculators, messaging, progress tracking, and tailoring. Many offer community features to communicate with other users and may include forums, chat rooms, or support from a tobacco treatment counselor. Many offer smartphone application versions of their services and tie into social media. 1988 - Present: Low Nicotine Cigarettes In 1988 Philip Morris launched Next, Merit, and Benson and Hedges Di-Nic Cigarettes in 3 test markets. In the 1980s cigarette manufacturers began investigating genetic bio- engineering of tobacco plants as a way to control nicotine delivery. SPECTRUM® (below) features cigarettes with eight different levels of nicotine content. Strictly for research purposes, Spectrum is not a commercially available cigarette. Quest, manufactured by Vector tobacco using genetically altered tobacco plants was available in three versions: Quest 1, Quest 2, and Quest 3.
    [Show full text]
  • E-Cigarette Use Among Youth and Young Adults: a Report of the Surgeon General
    E-Cigarette Use Among Youth and Young Adults: A Report of the Surgeon General 2016 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Public Health Service Office of the Surgeon General Rockville, MD National Library of Medicine Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: United States. Public Health Service. Office of the Surgeon General, issuing body. | National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (U.S.). Office on Smoking and Health, issuing body. Title: E-cigarette use among youth and young adults : a report of the Surgeon General. Description: Atlanta, GA : U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health, 2016. | Includes bibliographical references. Subjects: MESH: Electronic Cigarettes – utilization. | Smoking – adverse effects. | Electronic Cigarettes – adverse effects. | Tobacco Industry. | Young Adult. | Adolescent. | United States. Classification: NLM QV 137 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion Office on Smoking and Health For more information For more information about the Surgeon General’s report, visit www.surgeongeneral.gov. To download copies of this document, go to www.cdc.gov/tobacco. To order copies of this document, go to www.cdc.gov/tobacco and click on Publications Catalog or call 1-800-CDC-INFO (1-800-232-4636); TTY: 1-888-232-6348. Suggested Citation U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. E-Cigarette Use Among Youth and Young Adults. A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA: U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Section V V the DEFENDANTS CAUSED the CHARGED
    Section V V THE DEFENDANTS CAUSED THE CHARGED MAILINGS AND WIRE TRANSMISSIONS IN FURTHERANCE OF THE SCHEME TO DEFRAUD A. The Charged Defendants Caused the Mailings and Wire Transmissions 1. The Court finds that, consistent with the allegations set forth in the descriptions of the Racketeering Acts below (see Section V.B), the charged Defendants performed or caused the mailings or wire transmissions described in each of those respective Racketeering Acts to be sent, delivered, or received by the requisite means of transmission consistent with 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341 and 1343. 2. Brown & Williamson has stipulated that the requirements of 18 U.S.C. § 1341 or § 1343 have been met for the following Racketeering Acts: 8, 17, 31, 32, 38, 44, 45, 50, 51, 52, 54, 57, 60, 63, 66, 67, 77, 88, 98, 103, 106, 115, 116, 118, 124, 125, 127, 129, 144. 3. BATCo has stipulated that the requirements of 18 U.S.C. § 1341 or § 1343 have been met for the following Racketeering Acts: 11, 30, 50, 51, 53, 54, 57, 60, 63, 103, and 108. 4. In their responses to Requests for Admission, various Defendants have admitted that certain of the Racketeering Acts were transmitted by the requisite means of transmission (mail or wire), including the following Racketeering Acts: 11, 26, 30, 32, 38, 44-46, 50-55, 57, 60, 63, 66-67, 70, 73, 77, 79, 81, 82, 86, 88-90, 94, 96, 98-99, 103-106, 108-110, 114, and 116. 5. For purposes of the mail fraud violations covered by 18 U.S.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Iowa Cigarette Brand List
    Iowa Directory of Certified Tobacco Product Manufacturers and Brands PLEASE NOTE Flavored Cigarettes & RYO are now illegal. Regardless of being on this List. See footnote *(3) 8/12/20 Iowa Additions to the Directory (within the last six months) PM Nat's Philip Morris USA cigarettes 8/12/20 PM Montego Liggett Group Inc. cigarettes 6/8/20 Deletions to the Directory (within the last six months) PM Nat's Sherman 1400 Broadway NYC, Ltd. cigarettes 8/12/20 PM Ace King Maker Marketing cigarettes 5/7/20 PM Dreams Kretek International cigarettes 5/7/20 PM Gold Crest King Maker Marketing cigarettes 5/7/20 PM Wings Japan Tobacco International cigarettes 5/7/20 Type of Manufacturer is for Participating (PM) or Non-Participating (NPM) with the Master Settlement Agreement. TYPE BRAND MANUFACTURER PRODUCT DATE PM 1839 Premier Manufacturing cigarettes 10/1/14 PM 1839 Premier Manufacturing roll your own 10/1/14 NPM 24/7 Xcaliber International Ltd. cigarettes 12/13/18 PM American Bison Wind River Tobacco Co., LLC roll your own 7/22/03 NPM Aura Cheyenne International, LLC cigarettes 8/4/10 PM Bali Shag Top Tobacco, L.P. roll your own 11/9/18 PM Baron American Blend Farmers Tobacco Company of Cynthiana, Inc. cigarettes 9/20/05 PM Basic Philip Morris USA cigarettes 7/22/03 PM Benson & Hedges Philip Morris USA cigarettes 7/22/03 NPM Berley Xcaliber International Ltd. cigarettes 12/13/18 PM Black & Gold Sherman 1400 Broadway NYC, Ltd. cigarettes 7/22/03 PM Bronson Liggett Group Inc cigarettes 4/11/06 PM Bugler Scandinavian Tobacco Group Lane Ltd.
    [Show full text]
  • Glass Fiber Contamination of Cigarette Filters: an Additional Health Risk to the Smoker?'
    Vol. 7. 96 7-979. November 1998 Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention 967 Glass Fiber Contamination of Cigarette Filters: An Additional Health Risk to the Smoker?’ John L. Pauly,2 Hans J. Lee, Edward L. Hurley, 118/120, 98%; Menthol, n 120/120, 100%). Likewise, K. Michael Cummings, Joel D. Lesses, and 99% of NEW Eclipse had glass fibers on the redesigned Richard J. Streck filter (Regular, n = 119/120). In contrast, glass fibers Department of Molecular Immunology [J. L. P., H. J. L., J. D. L., R. J. S.], were never observed on the filters of conventional United Microscopy Ultrastructure Facility [E. L. H.], Cancer Control and States filter cigarettes that had been used as controls Epidemiology [K. M. C.], Roswell Park Cancer Institute (a unit of the New (n 0/120, 0%). In a study of Eclipse (n = 60), the York State Department of Health), Buffalo, New York 14263 number of glass fibers contaminating the filter surface ranged from S to 55. Glass fibers as well as fiber fracture items [aspect ratio, <3:1 (e.g., particles, fragments, bits, Abstract chips, flakes, specks, and dust)] were discovered in the We report here the results of studies documenting the pack residue. The average number of glass fibers in the contamination of a cigarette-appearing smoking article residue of a pack of Eclipse was 7,548 (SE ± 3443; range, labeled Eclipse with glass fibers, fragments, and particles. 1,164 to 26,725 glass fibers/pack; n 7 packs). The thin Eclipse, a product of the R. J. Reynolds Tobacco and fragile glass fibers of the insulation mats had most Company (RJR), was commercialized in June of 1996.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 in the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the MIDDLE DISTRICT of NORTH CAROLINA FUMA INTERNATIONAL LLC, an Ohio Limited Liabilit
    IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA FUMA INTERNATIONAL LLC, an Ohio limited liability company, Civil Action No. 1:19-cv-660 Plaintiff, DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL v. R.J. REYNOLDS VAPOR COMPANY, a North Carolina corporation, Defendant. COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT For its Complaint against Defendant R.J. Reynolds Vapor Company (“Reynolds Vapor,” “R.J. Reynolds,” or “Defendant”), Plaintiff Fuma International LLC (“Fuma”) alleges as follows: JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. This is a civil action for patent infringement arising under Title 35 of the United States Code, and in particular 35 U.S.C. §§ 271, 282, 283, 284, and 285. 2. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this patent infringement action under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a). 1 Case 1:19-cv-00660-CCE-JLW Document 1 Filed 07/02/19 Page 1 of 112 3. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because it is incorporated in and resides in North Carolina and this judicial district, solicits and conducts business in North Carolina, including the provision of goods, derives revenue from goods sold in North Carolina and within this judicial district, and has committed acts of infringement in this judicial district, including, but not limited to, offering to sell and selling the accused products in this judicial district. 4. Venue lies in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b) and (c), and 1400(b). THE PLAINTIFF 5. Plaintiff Fuma is a company organized and existing under the laws of the state of Ohio, with its principal place of business at 879 S.
    [Show full text]