LG Chemicals Wins Lawsuit in Ohio over E-Cigarette Battery Explosion

Nov.14.2022
LG Chemicals Wins Lawsuit in Ohio over E-Cigarette Battery Explosion
LG Chem wins lawsuit over e-cigarette battery explosion, as judge rules they had no jurisdiction over the case.

LG Chem Ltd. has successfully defeated a lawsuit in Ohio over exploding batteries in electronic cigarettes. A federal judge ruled that he did not have jurisdiction over the case, as the company, although having contact with the state, was not related to the disputed product.


Judge James L. Graham of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio wrote on Wednesday that the Seoul-based company has done enough business in Ohio, but the issue is that the plaintiff, Paul Straight's claims are not related to this business.


Although the judge pointed out that there was a dispute in court regarding whether a claim for injury caused by "unauthorized, independent use" of e-cigarette devices with batteries was related to the transportation of non-e-cigarette device battery packs by LG Chemical, he said he did not need to make a judgment on this argument.


This puts plaintiffs in a weakened position," wrote Judge Graham in his 14-page opinion. "There is no direct or close relationship between LG Chem and Ohio's contact with the 18650 battery that caused the plaintiffs' injuries.


Straight claims in his lawsuit that the battery of his e-cigarette exploded, causing burns to his left thigh and causing his jeans to catch on fire. He alleges that he suffered second and third-degree burns to his thigh and left wrist, which have now left him limping.


He has filed a lawsuit against LG Chem and its American subsidiary. He has also sued Vapor Station LLC for selling him a battery from one of their stores, as well as the company that supplied the battery to the store. The claims include violations of implied warranties under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act and Ohio state law.


LG Chemical maintains that it has not authorized any company to sell individual batteries. The judge pointed out that these batteries are meant for use in battery packs for power tools and other products.


Judge Graham has allowed for evidence collection to help resolve the jurisdictional dispute. LG Chem argues that it did not manufacture, sell, or distribute batteries in Ohio, while Straight maintains that the company's other business activities in the state are sufficient for the judge to exercise a specific jurisdiction.


The judge does not accept what is being said.


Judge Graham stated, "In fact, LG Chem has confirmed that it neither received revenue from the sale or distribution of 18650 batteries in Ohio, nor advertised or solicited business for 18650 batteries in Ohio.


Although the judge stated that Straight could not reject LG Chem's claim by testing for "association," he also rejected Straight's argument that it was unfair to dismiss the case because evidence showed that LG Chem knew the batteries were being used for vaping devices and posed a risk.


However, the lawsuit against another defendant is still under trial. Straight withdrew claims against Vapor Station and LG Chem's US subsidiary, but its claims against Picktown Vapor LLC for distributing batteries still remain.


A spokesperson for LG Energy Solutions, which is currently responsible for producing LG batteries, declined to comment on Thursday.


The lawyer for Straight did not immediately respond to a request for comment via email on Thursday.


This case has the docket number 2:20-cv-06551 and is being heard in the Southern District of Ohio court in the United States.


Statement:


This article is a compilation of third-party information intended for industry exchange and learning purposes only.


This article does not represent the views of 2FIRSTS, and 2FIRSTS cannot confirm the authenticity or accuracy of the content of the article. The translation of this article is only intended for communication and research within the industry.


Due to limitations in translation ability, the translated article may not fully reflect the original text. Please refer to the original text.


2FIRSTS aligns completely with the Chinese government on any statements or positions related to domestic affairs, issues involving Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan, and foreign relations.


The copyright of compiled information belongs to the original media and author. If there is any infringement, please contact us to request deletion.



Disclaimer

This article is provided solely for professional research, industry discussion, and informational purposes. Any references to brands, companies, products, technologies, or policies are made for factual reporting and analytical purposes only, and do not constitute endorsement, recommendation, promotion, or advertising by 2Firsts.

Nicotine-containing products, including but not limited to cigarettes, e-cigarettes, heated tobacco products, and nicotine pouches, carry significant health risks. Readers are responsible for complying with all applicable laws and regulations in their respective jurisdictions, including age restrictions and access limitations.

The information contained in this article should not be regarded as investment, legal, medical, regulatory, or commercial advice. While 2Firsts strives to ensure the accuracy and reliability of its content, it does not assume liability for any direct or indirect loss arising from errors, omissions, inaccuracies, or reliance on the information contained herein.

This article is not intended for individuals below the legal age for accessing tobacco or nicotine-related information in their jurisdiction.

 

Copyright Notice

This article is either original content produced by 2Firsts or content reproduced, translated, summarized, or adapted from third-party sources with attribution where applicable. The intellectual property rights of the original content remain with 2Firsts or the respective original rights holders.

No individual or organization may copy, reproduce, distribute, republish, modify, translate, or otherwise use this content without prior authorization. Any unauthorized use may result in legal action.

For copyright-related inquiries, corrections, or removal requests, please contact: info@2firsts.com.

 

AI-Assisted Translation and Editing Notice

Portions of this article may have been translated, edited, or reviewed with the assistance of artificial intelligence tools to improve efficiency and readability. Due to the limitations of AI-assisted translation and editing, discrepancies, omissions, or inaccuracies may exist when compared with the original source.

Where applicable, readers are advised to refer to the original source for the most complete and accurate information. If you identify any errors or believe that any content infringes upon your rights, please contact us at info@2firsts.com, and we will review and address the matter promptly.

Australia’s Victoria Steps Up Illegal Tobacco Enforcement With Store Closures and Penalties of Up to A$2.5 Million
Australia’s Victoria Steps Up Illegal Tobacco Enforcement With Store Closures and Penalties of Up to A$2.5 Million
Australia’s state of Victoria has activated new powers allowing Tobacco Licensing Victoria and police to shut premises suspected of selling, supplying or possessing illicit tobacco for up to 90 days. Longer closures can be ordered by a magistrates’ court. Businesses subject to closure orders must generally cease all trading and will be placed on a public list. Breaching a closure order can carry penalties of up to A$2.5 million and 20 years in prison.
Sep.10
Special Report | Altria Subsidiaries Sue FDA to Vacate 2021 PMTA Rule as Agency Moves to Speed Reviews
Special Report | Altria Subsidiaries Sue FDA to Vacate 2021 PMTA Rule as Agency Moves to Speed Reviews
2Firsts reviewed the original federal court complaint filed by Altria subsidiaries Helix Innovations and NJOY on Sept. 2 challenging FDA’s 2021 PMTA rule. The lawsuit questions whether FDA’s review process complies with the Tobacco Control Act’s 180-day timeline, even as the agency moves to accelerate PMTA reviews and issues more marketing orders. Drawing on the complaint, FDA records, government audits and recent court rulings, 2Firsts examines the legal arguments, supporting evidence and potential implications for the U.S. tobacco review system.
Regulations
Sep.03
R.J. Reynolds Vapor Company Launches Flavored Vuse Pro Pods in U.S. Without FDA Marketing Authorization
R.J. Reynolds Vapor Company Launches Flavored Vuse Pro Pods in U.S. Without FDA Marketing Authorization
R.J. Reynolds Vapor Company has begun selling four flavored Vuse Pro pods — Peach, Berry, Watermelon and Fresh Mint — in Ohio and selected other U.S. markets. According to the Vuse U.S. FAQ, Vuse Pro contains approximately 5.0% nicotine by weight, and Vuse Pro pre-filled pods are intended for use with Vuse Alto devices. Reynolds told 2Firsts that product labeling lists an e-liquid capacity of 2.0 mL per pod. The Vuse Alto Power Unit received FDA marketing authorization in 2024, while the new Vuse Pro pods themselves have not received marketing granted orders. The rollout follows the FDA’s May 2026 revision of enforcement priorities for certain unauthorized vaping products with qualifying pending applications.
BAT
Sep.10
Germany's Four-Year Tobacco Tax Plan Heads to Parliament as BAT, JTI and PMI Push for Changes
Germany's Four-Year Tobacco Tax Plan Heads to Parliament as BAT, JTI and PMI Push for Changes
Germany's parliament is scheduled to hold a first reading of amendments to the Tobacco Tax Act on September 24. The government plans annual tax increases from 2027 through 2030 covering cigarettes, heated tobacco, vaping liquids and other categories. It expects the reform to generate €756 million in additional revenue in 2027, rising to €3.589 billion in additional annual revenue by 2030. Ahead of the parliamentary debate, the German Association of the Tobacco Industry and Novel Products, or BVTE, launched the "Tabaksteuer mit Augenmaß" campaign backed by BAT, JTI, Philip Morris, Reemtsma and wholesale and retail groups.
Sep.23
Cochrane 2026 Update Adds Nine Trials, Keeps High-Certainty Finding That Nicotine E-Cigarettes Improve Quit Rates Over NRT
Cochrane 2026 Update Adds Nine Trials, Keeps High-Certainty Finding That Nicotine E-Cigarettes Improve Quit Rates Over NRT
Cochrane’s 2026 update of its living review on electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation included 80 randomized controlled trials involving 29,861 adult smokers, with nine trials added in this update. The review retained its high-certainty conclusion that nicotine e-cigarettes increase smoking cessation rates compared with nicotine replacement therapy. In absolute terms, about 10 in 100 people using nicotine e-cigarettes may quit smoking for at least six months, compared with about 6 in 100 using NRT. The review found no clear difference in serious adverse event rates between the two groups, while longer-term safety and the relative effectiveness of newer device types remain less certain.
Sep.07
FDA Unifies Tobacco Registration and Product Listing Form Across Product Categories
FDA Unifies Tobacco Registration and Product Listing Form Across Product Categories
The U.S. FDA has consolidated two tobacco establishment registration and product listing forms into a redesigned Form FDA 3741 covering all regulated product categories, including e-cigarettes, heated tobacco products and nicotine pouches. The current requirements remain limited to domestic establishments. Separately, the FDA has proposed extending registration and product listing requirements to foreign manufacturers, signaling greater regulatory attention to manufacturing entities and product-level information across the tobacco and nicotine supply chain.
FDA
Sep.30