In the U.S., you can sue a Federal Agency, but cannot collect damages from them. For example, when the FDA issued an order to Customs officials to confiscate shipments of e-cigarettes coming in from China, Smoking Everywhere filed suit in the U.S. District of Columbia, seeking an injunction against the seizures. They had to prove that their business was being harmed and that the seizures were unwarranted to get the injunction, but could not get back all the monies that were lost. Soterra, Inc (d/b/a NJOY) joined in the suit. Many months later, the injunction was granted but then was lifted almost immediately when the FDA appealed the decision. When the appeals court upheld the lower court ruling (re-granting the injunction against product seizures), NJOY was the only plaintiff left because Smoking Everywhere had gone bankrupt.
BTW: The ANTZ like to claim that the Federal courts
ordered the FDA to regulate e-cigarettes as tobacco products. However, it is more accurate to say that this was a suggestion. Judge Leon noted that the FDA had presented no evidence that anyone had been harmed by the product. Nevertheless, if the Agency was concerned about product safety, it had an avenue other than regulating the products as drugs/devices under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetics Act (FDCA). Since the definition of "tobacco product" was so broad that it included any product "derived from" tobacco, the Agency could regulate them as a "modified risk tobacco products" (MRTP) under the Tobacco Act. Little did the judge know that when the ANTZ were done with it, the "Guidance" for approval as an MRTP would be every bit as onerous as the regulations for gaining approval for a new drug or device under the FDCA. You can read the Judge's opinion document and see if you agree with my assessment.
http://www.casaa.org/uploads/SE-vs-FDA-Opinion.pdf
