Philip Morris Products SA Invalidates Patent in Court Victory

Jul.03.2022
Philip Morris Products successfully invalidated a patent claim over e-cigarette design by Renovo Tobacco, following litigation.

Philip Morris Products SA, a subsidiary of Philip Morris International Inc., has succeeded in convincing an administrative court that one of Reynolds Tobacco's patents covering the design of vapor electronic cigarettes is partially invalid. In 2020, Reynolds Tobacco and RJ Reynolds Vapor Co. filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Philip Morris International, claiming six patents, including the invalidated patent at issue.

 

On Thursday, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board stated that two claims in the U.S. Patent No. 9,814,268 are invalid. The patent pertains to an electronic smoking device containing tobacco that is designed to burn a small amount.

 

This article contains excerpts or reproductions from third-party sources, with the copyright belonging to the original media and authors. If there is any infringement, please contact us for removal. Any organization or individual who wishes to reprint should contact the author and not do so directly.

 


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.

Ohio Supreme Court Weighs Whether State Consumer Law Can Restrict Flavored Vape Sales
Ohio Supreme Court Weighs Whether State Consumer Law Can Restrict Flavored Vape Sales
The Ohio Supreme Court is hearing a case involving flavored vape sales and whether state authorities can use consumer protection laws to take action against retailers selling unauthorized vape products. Ohio officials argue that selling unauthorized flavored vapes may constitute consumer deception, while retailers argue that tobacco product regulation falls under federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authority and that states cannot impose additional restrictions through consumer laws. The case could affect the scope of state-level vape regulation across the United States.
Aug.06
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
Malaysia Withdraws Appeal Against Liquid Nicotine Ruling as Vape Regulation Framework Enters New Phase
Malaysia Withdraws Appeal Against Liquid Nicotine Ruling as Vape Regulation Framework Enters New Phase
Malaysia’s government has withdrawn its appeal against a High Court ruling concerning the regulatory status of liquid nicotine used in vape and e-cigarette products, according to reports by New Straits Times, Free Malaysia Today and CodeBlue on August 18, 2026. The Kuala Lumpur High Court ruled on May 15 that the government’s decision to remove liquid nicotine from the scheduled poisons list under the Poisons Act 1952 was irrational and made without proper consultation with the Poisons Board. The withdrawal ends the government’s appeal process, while the future regulatory framework for nicotine vape products remains under discussion.
Aug.21
UK HMRC Urges Public to Report Suspicious Vape Shops in Crackdown on Tax Fraud, Money Laundering and Illicit Tobacco Sales
UK HMRC Urges Public to Report Suspicious Vape Shops in Crackdown on Tax Fraud, Money Laundering and Illicit Tobacco Sales
HM Revenue & Customs is urging members of the public to report vape shops, barber shops and other high-street businesses suspected of tax fraud, money laundering or other illegal activity, with informants not required to provide personal details. HMRC plans more than 30,000 interventions in 2026-27 targeting tax fraud, organised crime and illicit activity, including the sale of illegal vapes and tobacco. The push forms part of a broader UK effort to tackle organised crime on high streets, backed by a £30 million government enforcement programme.
Regulations
Aug.17 by 2Firsts Perspectives
UK Reform Party Proposes Cap of 1,000 Vape Shops Under Plan to Tighten Retail Controls
UK Reform Party Proposes Cap of 1,000 Vape Shops Under Plan to Tighten Retail Controls
The UK Reform Party has proposed limiting the number of dedicated vape shops in the country to around 1,000 as part of a plan to tighten oversight of vape retail channels. The proposal was put forward by Reform UK deputy leader and MP Lee Anderson. The plan remains a political proposal and has not become UK government policy, with no detailed legislation, implementation timeline or allocation rules announced.
Aug.10
Former FDA Scientist Questions ZYN Review Over Pouch Material and Microplastic Risk
Former FDA Scientist Questions ZYN Review Over Pouch Material and Microplastic Risk
A former FDA toxicologist has questioned whether the agency fully assessed the material used in ZYN nicotine pouches before authorizing them for sale, raising concerns over possible microplastic exposure, according to STAT and The Examination.
Jul.16