Smoking Everywhere V. FDA Daily Docket Sheet Update--APPEAL's COURT ISSUES STAY

[D103]

Just my two cents - I am in no way an expert on the law, lawsuits, apellate courts, Judges etc. However I still feel it is significant that ONLY NOW have the ALA, AHA, ACS and the rest of the "posse" joined this lawsuit. As I said in another thread I feel this indicates that we are making a difference by virtue of the fact that you do not bring out the "Big Guns" if you're fight is "in the bag" and you're fighting a bunch of duffers. These big and "prestigious" corporations generally try to stay away from lawsuits. If I were one of the Judges on the panel I would think 1) Why, at the Eleventh Hour, have all these
big name entities involved themselves in these proceedings-if they were 'truly concerned' about the 'supposed dangers' of electronic cigarettes and the 'supposed threat' to public health why were they not involved from the very beginning 2) If the FDA is pushing for the electronic cigarette to be classified as a medical device and NOT a tobacco product, then why are the anti-tobacco organizations involved and indeed why the American Cancer Society since it is a KNOWN fact that nicotine does not cause, contribute to or in any other way influence cancer. 3) What exactly is the agenda of these cockroaches in three-piece suits and again, why, at this late date, have they dared show themselves in the light of day and involve themselves in these proceedings - what are they really concerned about and why, now, are they trying to influence this court.
Anyway, that's what I would think if I were a Judge on this panel (probably why I'm not a Judge-oh well)

 

[Vicks Vap-oh-Yeah]

D103 - my take on the 'big guns' appearing is simple:

They tried going to the state level to get PV's banned - they tried in CA, in IL, in NY, OH, etc. With the exception of NY (still pending) each and every one of these proposed legislations has failed to pass into law. Cathy Drea (lobbyist for ALA) was in the hearing room in IL as what was supposed to be a 'slam dunk' piece of law. WE changed that. So now they've changed their tactics to support this federal case to pursue their goals.

I've become convinced (and this is only MY THEORY, so YMMV) that this is the push of the Pharma industry for a full-blown grab of the US (and in time, the world's) recreational nicotine market. They want to be legalized pushers for the masses of smokers. The final piece of the puzzle is what they're trying to do in the UK.

 

[BigJimW]

It wouldn't surprise me. The fact that they are receiving resistance from e-cig suppliers and users, has probably left them determined to show us who is the boss and that resistance is futile.

A little dated now that Bush is out, but still valid.

 

[Janetda]

The point of posting the B6 and walnut issues was to demonstrate that the type of misuse of power and preferential treatment shown toward pharmaceutical companies is a pattern within the FDA. These are the same issues seen in other types of industries, not just tobacco or nicotine. The FDA can take a legal, effective substance and mandate that it’s a drug if a pharmaceutical company wants to market it. And, even if multiple studies show something to be healthy or healthier, companies are not allowed to use it in their advertising, unless it comes from a pharmaceutical company.

IMO this is a demonstration of a pattern of misuse of the FDA's powers that I believe is relevant in this case.

 

[DC2]

I think we can all agree that the FDA is full of crap.
I have never before, until my foray into electronic cigarettes, believed in conspiracies.

But here it is, right here, right now, in front of my eyes.
And if we're being honest, they are seriously threatening my life.

 

[Sun Vaporer]

Sun, they are all anti-tobacco groups, so wouldn't their opposition to e-cigs confirm SE's argument that the e-cig is a tobacco product?

Or have they all changed their tune and are now anti-nicotine?

Afterthought. They should all merge together into one group. They could call themselves the "American Anti-freedom Foundation".

Jerry---these Groups represent a broad spectrum of the medical field in the US. I would have to agree that they are more "pro-pharm" as opposed to "anti-tobbaco".


Sun

 

[JerryRM]

Jerry---these Groups represent a broad spectrum of the medical field in the US. I would have to agree that the are more "pro-pharm" as opposed to "anti-tobbaco".


Sun

All of this attention being paid to e-cigs is unbelievable. These groups and the FDA are most certainly being controlled by someone else.

 

[Sun Vaporer]

All of this attention being paid to e-cigs is unbelievable. These groups and the FDA are most certainly being controlled by someone else.

Really is beyond comprehension how much attention our little gadgets are getting. I think they are scared to death of the e-cigs possibilities. And it is hard to think that Big Phama is not the "player".


Sun

 

[Bill Godshall]

Don't know what legal arguments WLF plans to present, but it could be helpful if e-cigarette advocacy groups contact the WLF to inquire about joining in on their amicus brief (which could help neutralize the list of health groups in the opposing amicus brief).

The WLF notice of intent:


Case No. 10-5032
___________
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
___________

SMOKING EVERYWHERE, INC.,
Plaintiff/Appellee,
and
SOTTERA, INC. D/B/A NJOY,
Intervenor-Plaintiff/Appellee,
v.
FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, et al.,
Defendants/Appellants.

___________
On Appeal from the U.S. District Court
for the District of Columbia
No. 09-771 (Hon. Richard J. Leon)
___________
NOTICE OF WASHINGTON LEGAL FOUNDATION
OF INTENT TO FILE AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF
IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS/APPELLEES
___________

...... WLF is a public-interest law and policy center that regularly appears in this Court in cases raising public policy issues. WLF has no financial ties, direct or indirect, with any party to this appeal.



WLF is a public interest law and policy center that devotes a substantial portion of its resources to defending and promoting free enterprise, individual rights, and a limited and accountable government.

 

[Bill Godshall]

Per my posting above, it also appears that the WLF is permitted to file its amicus brief (because they notified the court during the 60 period), while the ACS/ALA/AHA, etc still need to obtain the court's permission to file (because they missed the 60 day period).

 

[Sun Vaporer]

Per my posting above, it also appears that the WLF is permitted to file its amicus brief (because they notified the court during the 60 period), while the ACS/ALA/AHA, etc still need to obtain the court's permission to file (because they missed the 60 day period).

I think that is what I wrote Bill


Sun

 

[DC2]

Per my posting above, it also appears that the WLF is permitted to file its amicus brief (because they notified the court during the 60 period), while the ACS/ALA/AHA, etc still need to obtain the court's permission to file (because they missed the 60 day period).

If true, can others join the amicus brief with WLF without issue?
Or would they also be subject to the same restrictions?

 

[Sun Vaporer]

If true, can others join the amicus brief with WLF without issue?
Or would they also be subject to the same restrictions?

DC2--after 60 days, you must file leave of the Court and show there is no prejudice to the opposing parties. As it stands now, there is no prejudice--but any closer to the FDA filing its brief---forget it.


Sun

 

[rothenbj]

Bill, can CASAA represent 40 to 60 million constituents, even if many of them don't know what the fight is about? This sounds bizarre, but these "health" organizations are spewing out numbers of volunteers and contributors as if they all agree with the stand that the powers are promoting. As many smokers have no idea what this battle is about, I'm sure many of the numbers quoted by these people would not side with them if they understood what was really going on?

Many in their numbers got there because of whatever promotion they were working on, other are their because a loved one passed and donations were directed toward them. I'm just saying that if the battleground was understood, would all those quoted by the anti-tobacco groups side with them or with something that could have saved lives?

They do have numbers that are verifiable since they got money from them, but........

 

[Drozd]

DC2--after 60 days, you must file leave of the Court and show there is no prejudice to the opposing parties. As it stands now, there is no prejudice--but any closer to the FDA filing its brief---forget it.


Sun

so in theory CASSA could file for leave of the Court and file their own brief in support of SE/Njoy?

Possibly just to state the facts as far as the true #s in the reports and how they've been spun? or to give the poll results of how people are really using PVs and who they really appeal to?

 

[Sun Vaporer]

so in theory CASSA could file for leave of the Court and file their own brief in support of SE/Njoy?

Possibly just to state the facts as far as the true #s in the reports and how they've been spun? or to give the poll results of how people are really using PVs and who they really appeal to?

That would be a great if they did Drozd.


Sun

 

[Bobnoxious]

I think that is what I wrote Bill


Sun

Mr. Vaporer, up until now, I didn't know this. Until Bill spelled it out. And I have been reading this thread quite intensely. Is this what 'leave of court' means?

Being ex-military, I was thinking everyone was filing for a court vacation.

 

[Sun Vaporer]

Mr. Vaporer, up until now, I didn't know this. Until Bill spelled it out. And I have been reading this thread quite intensely. Is this what 'leave of court' means?

Being ex-military, I was thinking everyone was filing for a court vacation.

Bob--Leave of the Court is asking the Courts permission. If the Motion was filed within 60 days of the filing of the Appeal, then leave is not required.


Sun

 

[Windsage]

Does the CASSA have the resources to file on behalf of its members?

It would be good to get a lot of the information in the record. I also think the survey results are quite interesting. I think you would have to preface those results with a statement that the survey was not fully scientific, but it does speak loudly of a fairly large group of people that have found these devices useful and pleasing.

 

[Sun Vaporer]

Does the CASSA have the resources to file on behalf of its members?

It would be good to get a lot of the information in the record. I also think the survey results are quite interesting. I think you would have to preface those results with a statement that the survey was not fully scientific, but it does speak loudly of a fairly large group of people that have found these devices useful and pleasing.

Windsage--in resources, I take it to mean money. They just started taking donations so I do not know. You may want to ask them if they have the funds to hire Counsel.


Sun