Rome City Council to Ban E-Cigarette Sales in District

Aug.26.2024
Rome City Council to Ban E-Cigarette Sales in District
Rome News-Tribune reported on August 26th that Rome City Council plans to announce ban on e-cigarette sales and coin-operated gaming machines.

According to Rome News-Tribune on August 26, the Rome City Council is expected to announce on Monday (the 26th) a designated area that will effectively ban the sale of e-cigarette products within the city limits. Additionally, coin-operated gaming machines will also be prohibited.


The first reading of the regulation is scheduled to take place at the regular meeting of the board of directors.


The new Etowah River-Turner McCall coverage area will include all areas south of Turner McCall Avenue, surrounded by the Etowah and Oostanaula Rivers. It also encompasses the adjacent areas across the Oostanaula River, surrounded by Turner McCall Avenue and North Second Avenue.


This regulation provides existing retailers with an amortization period to recoup their investments in e-cigarette products and coin-operated amusement machines (commonly known as "ding dings"). At the same time, it prohibits the opening of new stores.


The introduction of the proposed regulation is scheduled to take place at the core meeting of the board at 5 p.m. and a vote will be held at the regular meeting at 6:30 p.m.


We welcome news tips, article submissions, interview requests, or comments on this piece.

Please contact us at info@2firsts.com, or reach out to Alan Zhao, CEO of 2Firsts, on LinkedIn


Notice

1.  This article is intended solely for professional research purposes related to industry, technology, and policy. Any references to brands or products are made purely for objective description and do not constitute any form of endorsement, recommendation, or promotion by 2Firsts.

2.  The use of nicotine-containing products — including, but not limited to, cigarettes, e-cigarettes, nicotine pouchand heated tobacco products — carries significant health risks. Users are responsible for complying with all applicable laws and regulations in their respective jurisdictions.

3.  This article is not intended to serve as the basis for any investment decisions or financial advice. 2Firsts assumes no direct or indirect liability for any inaccuracies or errors in the content.

4.  Access to this article is strictly prohibited for individuals below the legal age in their jurisdiction.

 

Copyright

 

This article is either an original work created by 2Firsts or a reproduction from third-party sources with proper attribution. All copyrights and usage rights belong to 2Firsts or the original content provider. Unauthorized reproduction, distribution, or any other form of unauthorized use by any individual or organization is strictly prohibited. Violators will be held legally accountable.

For copyright-related inquiries, please contact: info@2firsts.com

 

AI Assistance Disclaimer

 

This article may have been enhanced using AI tools to improve translation and editorial efficiency. However, due to technical limitations, inaccuracies may occur. Readers are encouraged to refer to the cited sources for the most accurate information.

We welcome any corrections or feedback. Please contact us at: info@2firsts.com

JUUL2 Sued Within a Week of FDA Authorization as AJ Marketing Alleges Infringement of Programmable Vape Patent
JUUL2 Sued Within a Week of FDA Authorization as AJ Marketing Alleges Infringement of Programmable Vape Patent
Less than a week after JUUL2 received U.S. FDA marketing authorization on August 28, 2026, JUUL Labs was sued for patent infringement in federal court in Delaware. AJ Marketing LLC filed the complaint on September 3, alleging that both JUUL 1 and JUUL2 infringe U.S. Patent No. 8,851,068 B2. The patent covers aspects of programmable electronic vaporization devices, including controls over dose delivery, usage frequency and operating parameters. The plaintiff is seeking reasonable royalties and ongoing royalties tied to the remaining life of the patent. JUUL has not yet publicly responded to the case.
Sep.10
Special Report | From New York to Washington: How FDA’s Tobacco Center Is Reworking Product Review
Special Report | From New York to Washington: How FDA’s Tobacco Center Is Reworking Product Review
FDA’s Center for Tobacco Products is reshaping how it approaches tobacco product review. Based on 2Firsts’ on-site reporting in New York and Washington, this report traces CTP’s emerging direction: stronger links between PMTA and tobacco harm reduction, more category-specific review, greater emphasis on decision-relevant science, more predictable timelines and expanded use of sPMTA for product modifications. CTP also acknowledged major constraints, including just nine PMTA review teams, persistent backlogs and limits on hiring capacity.
Regulations
Oct.08
How Large Is France’s Off-Channel Tobacco Market? Logista Says It Has Become Structural, While the Official Estimate Is 17.7% and Some Industry Studies Put It Above 50%
How Large Is France’s Off-Channel Tobacco Market? Logista Says It Has Become Structural, While the Official Estimate Is 17.7% and Some Industry Studies Put It Above 50%
Logista France says tobacco consumption outside France’s official tobacconist network has become a large and structural market phenomenon, but official and industry estimates differ sharply. France’s TAFE study estimates that 17.7% of tobacco consumption escaped domestic taxation in 2023, with most of that volume attributed to cross-border purchasing rather than street sales. Some industry studies use broader off-channel definitions and put the figure above 50%. Meanwhile, French Customs seized 547.94 tonnes of tobacco in 2025, up 12%, showing continued pressure from illicit trade.
Sep.04
Virginia Tobacco Retail Permit Takes Effect October 1, Covering Vapes as More Than 3,000 Businesses Apply in September
Virginia Tobacco Retail Permit Takes Effect October 1, Covering Vapes as More Than 3,000 Businesses Apply in September
Virginia's new retail tobacco permit system took effect October 1, requiring sellers of vapes, nicotine products and related devices and accessories to obtain a Retail Tobacco Permit for each business location. Virginia ABC said more than 3,000 businesses applied in September alone, creating a processing backlog. Qualifying applicants that filed before October 1 may temporarily operate under a Letter of Authorization. The new store-level permit also sits alongside Virginia's existing vape product directory, where sales of unlisted liquid nicotine or nicotine vapor products can trigger civil penalties starting at $5,000.
Regulations
Oct.03
Product | JT to Launch MEVIUS Tropical Option in Japan, Expanding Ploom Tobacco Stick Lineup to 32
Product | JT to Launch MEVIUS Tropical Option in Japan, Expanding Ploom Tobacco Stick Lineup to 32
Japan Tobacco (JT) will launch MEVIUS Tropical Option, a new tobacco stick for Ploom, nationwide in Japan from October 6, 2026. The capsule-format product combines mango-oriented sweetness with menthol cooling, adding a tropical flavor to the MEVIUS Ploom tobacco-stick lineup for the first time. Each pack contains 20 sticks and will launch at JPY 590. The product is compatible with all Ploom devices, and its addition will expand the Ploom tobacco-stick portfolio to 32 variants.
Sep.08
JUUL Purchasers Ask Ninth Circuit to Preserve Antitrust Classes in Case Over Altria’s $12.8 Billion Investment
JUUL Purchasers Ask Ninth Circuit to Preserve Antitrust Classes in Case Over Altria’s $12.8 Billion Investment
Private antitrust litigation stemming from Altria's 2018 $12.8 billion investment for a 35% economic interest in JUUL is advancing before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Direct purchasers, indirect purchasers and indirect resellers of JUUL products filed answering briefs this week seeking to preserve class certifications granted by a California federal court in February. Altria and JUUL argue that individual consumers and large distributors differ too much in purchasing terms to remain in a single direct-purchaser class, while a separate dispute concerns whether California antitrust law can apply to indirect purchasers across 27 jurisdictions. A September trial has been put on hold during the appeal.
Sep.23