Juul asks court for temporary block on FDA’s ban of its e-cigarettes

Juul asks court for temporary block on FDA’s ban of its e-cigarettes


Juul brand vape cartridges are pictured for sale at a shop in Atlanta, Georgia.

Elijah Nouvelage | Reuters

Juul asked a federal appeals court on Friday to block the Food and Drug Administration’s ban on its e-cigarettes temporarily.

The request came less than a day after the health agency told the company that it had to pull its vaping products off the U.S. market, effective immediately. According to the FDA, Juul’s applications to keep selling its vaping device and menthol- and tobacco-flavored nicotine pods gave insufficient or conflicting data about the potential risks of using the company’s products.

Juul disagreed, saying in a statement that it provided sufficient research and evidence to address the issues raised by the agency. The company’s chief regulatory officer, Joe Murillo, said in a statement on Thursday that Juul is exploring its options, which include appealing the decision or engaging with the FDA.

In a filing with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, Juul asked for an emergency administrative stay until it can file a motion for a stay pending review by noon on Monday. If granted, the company and retailers would be able to keep distributing and selling Juul products until the court reviews the agency’s decision.

“[Juul’s] only prospect for meaningful relief that permits it to continue selling its products is an immediate stay,” the company said in the filing.

Juul claimed that the FDA subjected it to unfair treatment compared with other e-cigarette makers. According to the filing, the agency’s press release announcing its ruling on Juul products was “more strident and threatening” than previous denials.

“FDA’s decision is arbitrary and capricious and lacks substantial evidence, and an immediate administrative stay is critical to protect JLI, its commercial partners, and its customers,” Juul said.

The company also called out the agency for imposing immediate enforcement, rather than instating a transition period, which is typical unless the product poses an immediate risk to consumers.

The FDA declined to comment.



Source

Supreme Court endorses Obamacare panel that requires free preventive care
Health

Supreme Court endorses Obamacare panel that requires free preventive care

Demonstrators in support of U.S. President Barack Obama’s health-care law, the Affordable Care Act (ACA), hold up ‘ACA is Here to Stay’ signs after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 to save Obamacare tax subsidies outside the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C. June 25, 2015. Andrew Harrer | Bloomberg | Getty Images WASHINGTON — The […]

Read More
Supreme Court rules for South Carolina over bid to defund Planned Parenthood
Health

Supreme Court rules for South Carolina over bid to defund Planned Parenthood

Planned Parenthood signage is displayed outside of a health care clinic in Los Angeles, California on May 16, 2023.  Patrick T. Fallon | AFP | Getty Images WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled for South Carolina over its effort to defund Planned Parenthood, concluding that individual Medicaid patients cannot sue to enforce their […]

Read More
Healthy Returns: New weight loss drug data show Eli Lilly is gaining ground
Health

Healthy Returns: New weight loss drug data show Eli Lilly is gaining ground

A sign with the company logo sits outside of the headquarters of Eli Lilly in Indianapolis, Indiana, on March 17, 2024. Scott Olson | Getty Images A version of this article first appeared in CNBC’s Healthy Returns newsletter, which brings the latest health-care news straight to your inbox. Subscribe here to receive future editions. Competition in […]

Read More