Key Takeaways：
· iMiracle, the manufacturer behind Elf Bar, has agreed to stop selling all flavored disposable vapes in California as part of its settlement with NJOY.
· Both parties jointly filed a motion asking the court to impose a permanent injunction barring the sale or shipment of flavored tobacco products within the state.
· The court has already made a prior preliminary injunction against retailers permanent and allowed NJOY to amend its complaint to refine its legal claims.
· NJOY’s original lawsuit named 34 manufacturers, distributors, and retailers; most were later dismissed, leaving iMiracle as a primary defendant.
Settlement Reached: Court to Issue Permanent Injunction
In a joint motion filed Thursday in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, iMiracle (HK) Ltd. and Shenzhen Imiracle Technology Co., Ltd. consented to a permanent injunction that would prevent them from violating California’s ban on flavored tobacco products.
If approved, the injunction would bar the companies from selling or shipping flavored disposable e-cigarettes to any consumer, retailer, wholesaler, or distributor in California.
It would also prohibit shipments to out-of-state buyers if the companies “know or should know” that the products could end up in California.
The motion effectively ends sales in California of flavored disposable vapes produced by iMiracle, the maker of the Elf Bar brand.
Case Background: Altria and iMiracle Legal Dispute
The lawsuit, brought by NJOY LLC, alleged that iMiracle’s companies illegally distributed and sold flavored e-cigarettes in the United States without marketing authorization from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), in violation of California’s statewide flavor ban.
NJOY claimed it suffered a competitive disadvantage because consumers chose the cheaper, flavored products from Elf Bar and similar brands over NJOY’s FDA-authorized, tobacco-flavored devices.
According to the complaint, at the time of filing, NJOY was the only FDA-authorized manufacturer of a closed-pod vapor device, the NJOY Ace.
Altria first launched a nationwide lawsuit in October 2023, targeting Elf Bar and other popular flavored vape brands, seeking a nationwide injunction. The case was later voluntarily dismissed.
In 2024, NJOY narrowed its focus to California and re-filed its case against iMiracle and Elf Bar in the Southern District.
Negotiations and Settlement: California Flavor Ban at the Core
Court filings show that NJOY and iMiracle began settlement discussions after July 2025 and informed the court earlier this month that an agreement had been reached.
Although specific terms remain confidential, the latest filings confirm that both sides agreed to resolve the dispute through a permanent injunction against Elf Bar.
iMiracle denies all liability and wrongdoing but agreed that any violation of the injunction could be treated as contempt of court.
The settlement is conditional: the injunction will remain in force only as long as California maintains its current flavor-tobacco ban. If the ban is repealed or substantially modified, the injunction will cease to apply.
Case Development and Three Additional Threads
1. Scope of the Original Complaint and Defendants
According to Altria’s 2023 public statement, NJOY’s initial lawsuit cast a wide net, naming 34 manufacturers, distributors, and online retailers across the vaping supply chain.
The complaint listed defendants including Elf Bar / EB, Esco Bar, Lava Plus, Breeze, Lost Mary, Puff Bar, and Mr. Fog.
However, in early 2024, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California dismissed most defendants, ruling that many lacked sufficient transactional connection to be joined in the same action (improper joinder).
Only entities most closely linked to iMiracle remained.
The court also denied NJOY’s request to serve iMiracle by email, requiring formal international service under the Hague Service Convention.
2. Settlement Signals in the Court Docket
The public docket for the Southern District case lists multiple entries labeled “Notice of Settlement” and “Settlement Notice,” suggesting that several aspects of the dispute have been or are being resolved.
Other docket entries still list defendants such as Shenzhen Han and Guangdong Qisitech, indicating NJOY continues to maintain active claims against additional companies.
3. Cross-Border Service Issues
Early in the proceedings, the court rejected NJOY’s attempt to serve iMiracle via email, citing Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(f) and the Hague Convention’s formal international service requirements.
Subsequent motions for “alternative service,” including those concerning Guangdong Qisitech, were later denied or rendered moot—illustrating the procedural complexity and cost of litigating against overseas manufacturers.
Nature and Legal Characterization of the Settlement
Notably, the specific terms of the settlement have not been disclosed, indicating that the parties opted for a confidential settlement. Court records confirm that an agreement was reached but provide no details regarding monetary compensation, cost allocation, or subsequent commercial arrangements.
From a procedural standpoint, the case did not conclude through a simple dismissal, but rather through a Joint Motion for Permanent Injunction jointly submitted by both sides. The court’s issuance of this injunction gives the settlement judicial enforceability. In other words, it represents a conditional settlement—the plaintiff agreed to cease further claims, while the defendant remains bound by the terms of the injunction.
Legal analysts often refer to this type of arrangement as a “litigation–injunction trade-off”: the defendant accepts court-ordered restrictions in exchange for ending the case and avoiding an explicit finding of liability. In this instance, iMiracle denied all allegations and legal responsibility, yet agreed to comply with the injunction. This approach brings the dispute to a formal close while preserving the court’s authority over future enforcement.
Timeline of Key Events
- October 2023: NJOY files a nationwide lawsuit targeting Elf Bar and other flavored vape brands.
- February 2024: NJOY refiles the case in the Southern District of California, focusing on iMiracle.
- December 2024: The court issues a preliminary injunction barring four California retailers from selling Elf Bar products.
- June 2025: The court makes that injunction permanent and grants NJOY permission to amend its complaint.
- October 2025: NJOY and iMiracle file a joint motion seeking a permanent injunction against the manufacturer, effectively closing the case.
Legal Representation
For NJOY ( Plaintiff ):
- Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP — Lauren S. Wulfe, Kristina Iliopoulos, John C. Massaro, David E. Kouba, Paul W. Rodney
- Noonan Lance & Boyer LLP — David J. Noonan
For iMiracle / Shenzhen Imiracle Technology Co., Ltd. ( Defendants ):
- Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati PC — Catherine A. O’Connor, Natalie J. Morgan, Jeffrey C. Bank, Jordanne M. Steiner
Case Information
- Case Title: NJOY LLC v. Imiracle (HK) Ltd. et al.
- Case No.: 3:24-cv-00397
- Court: U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California
The cover image was generated by ChatGPT.
