The FDA Suspends Its Own Juul Marketing Denial Order

Regulations
Jul.14.2022
In what is appearing as a ridiculous series of events, the FDA is having to go back on its own decision and “temporarily suspending the marketing denial order (MDO) pending additional review,” seemingly in response to legal documents filed by Juul immediately after the MDO was issued.

"The FDA said it will conduct further reviews into the Juul applications.

The FDA Suspends Its Own Juul Marketing Denial Order

Many health and anti-vape groups had been pressuring the FDA to reject any PMTA applications by Juul for months. In fact earlier this year, several groups joined forces and sent a letter to the FDA urging it to take action on the outstanding PMTAs and deny any applications for flavoured vaping products.

 

Entities such as the American Lung Association (ALA) and the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids said they were “deeply disappointed” that the FDA was still studying a percentage of the applications, including Juul’s. ECigIntelligence had revealed that the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids had gone as far as threatening to take the agency to court if it did not “immediately clarify” the timeline and reason for these delays.

 

Finally last month, the FDA issued Juul an MDO. The decision applied to “all of their products currently marketed in the United States,” and would have forced the manufacturer to completely exit the US market. “We recognize these make up a significant part of the available products and many have played a disproportionate role in the rise in youth vaping,” stated FDA Commissioner Robert M. Califf.

 

Juul denied claims that it had not submitted enough documentation

 

However in response to this, Juul immediately filed an emergency motion at a federal appeals court asking the court to take a stance against an “extraordinary and unlawful action” by the FDA. A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled in favour of Juul, allowing the products to remain on the market.

 

In issuing the MDOs, the FDA accused Juul of failing to submit enough information in its applications, leaving regulators with many questions. However during the court filing, Juul revealed that it had submitted a 125,000-page application to the FDA nearly two years ago, adding that the application included several studies to evaluate the health risks among Juul users.

 

Subsequently, the FDA has just announced it is suspending its decision in order to conduct further reviews. “FDA is reviewing the marketing denial orders it issued to JUUL because in the course of reviewing litigation briefing materials the agency determined that there are scientific issues unique to this application that warrant additional review,” said an FDA spokesperson as quoted by Filter. The spokesperson added that because Juul’s “products do not have marketing authorization, [the company] cannot legally market, ship or sell their products,” and “the stay does not change this.”

 

“With this administrative stay from the FDA now in place, we continue to offer our products to adult smokers while we pursue the agency’s internal review process,” Joe Murillo, the chief regulatory officer at Juul Labs, said in a statement. “We remain confident in the quality and substance of our applications and believe that ultimately we will be able to demonstrate that our products do in fact meet the statutory standard of being appropriate for the protection of the public health. We now look forward to re-engaging with the FDA on a science- and evidence-based process to pursue a marketing authorization for JUUL products.”

 

Filter highlighted that that the FDA decision could be translated in one of two ways: “Either the FDA is looking to bolster its initial MDO; or it believes it may have erred and could release a full rescission, placing Juul once again in scientific review.”

 

The content excerpted or reproduced in this article comes from a third-party, and the copyright belongs to the original media and author. If any infringement is found, please contact us to delete it. Any entity or individual wishing to forward the information, please contact the author and refrain from forwarding directly from here.

Smoore Seeks to Toss CCELL Price-Fixing Claim as Court Weighs Vertical Distribution Versus Horizontal Conspiracy
Smoore Seeks to Toss CCELL Price-Fixing Claim as Court Weighs Vertical Distribution Versus Horizontal Conspiracy
Smoore and four authorized U.S. CCELL distributors are asking a California federal court to permanently dismiss a core antitrust claim brought by direct purchasers. Plaintiffs allege that Smoore coordinated minimum wholesale prices, customer allocation and limits on price competition among distributors, amounting to a per se unlawful horizontal conspiracy. The defendants say the alleged conduct reflects ordinary vertical relationships between a manufacturer and its distributors. The court previously dismissed a similar claim, and the latest dispute centers on whether the second amended complaint adds sufficient facts to establish a horizontal agreement.
Sep.14
STIIIZY Redesign Fails to Escape PAX Labs Patent Import Ban as Section 337 Case Also Involves China ALD
STIIIZY Redesign Fails to Escape PAX Labs Patent Import Ban as Section 337 Case Also Involves China ALD
U.S. Customs and Border Protection ruled that STIIIZY had not shown that the redesigned cannabis-vape products covered by its latest request fall outside an ITC limited exclusion order tied to PAX Labs patents. CBP accepted some of STIIIZY’s claim-construction and non-infringement arguments, but the company did not address two additional claims in the same patent. Earlier STIIIZY redesigned cartridges and certain associated components imported with them had received separate CBP clearance.
Sep.16
Elf Bar Vape Explosion and Amputation Claim Spurs Coverage Suit, U.S. Insurer MUSIC Seeks Ruling It Owes No Duty to Defend or Indemnify Distributor i5
Elf Bar Vape Explosion and Amputation Claim Spurs Coverage Suit, U.S. Insurer MUSIC Seeks Ruling It Owes No Duty to Defend or Indemnify Distributor i5
Mesa Underwriters Specialty Insurance Company has asked a federal court in Washington to declare that it has no duty to defend or indemnify vape distributor i5 Distribution in a product liability case involving an Elf Bar BC5000. The plaintiff alleges that the disposable vape caught fire and exploded in his pocket, causing severe burns and ultimately requiring an above-the-knee amputation of his left leg. MUSIC is relying on a tobacco, nicotine or nicotine replacement products exclusion and a premises limitation endorsement. The court has not ruled on the coverage dispute.
News
Sep.10
IKE Tech Launches IKE 2.0 Compliance Platform for Nicotine Products
IKE Tech Launches IKE 2.0 Compliance Platform for Nicotine Products
IKE Tech launched IKE 2.0 on September 28, initially targeting nicotine products with a platform that combines user identity verification, product authentication, configurable policy controls and data analytics. Products can be authenticated through direct device integration or NFC smart tags. IKE Tech was formed with participation from Ispire's Aspire North America, Berify and Chemular, with Ispire currently holding a 40% interest. Its age-verification component PMTA was accepted by the FDA in 2025 and remains under review. The company did not disclose customer names, commercial deployment volumes, pricing or revenue tied to IKE 2.0.
News
Sep.29 by 2Firsts Perspectives
Special Report|CrossBar's High-Puff Vapes Draw Attention on Pennsylvania's 163-Product Directory as Link Between Earlier 1.3mL PMTA Filings and New 13mL Products Remains Unclear
Special Report|CrossBar's High-Puff Vapes Draw Attention on Pennsylvania's 163-Product Directory as Link Between Earlier 1.3mL PMTA Filings and New 13mL Products Remains Unclear
Pennsylvania began enforcing its electronic nicotine delivery system directory restrictions on October 19, 2026. Among 163 product listings recorded before enforcement, four CrossBar 20K disposables stood out with 13mL capacity, advertised puff counts of up to 20,000 and a flattened design distinct from conventional pod systems and compact disposables. Historical records identify earlier 1.3mL CrossBar products associated with Romo LLC, while newer 13mL products appeared in several state directories beginning in 2025 under entities including Blue Nine LLC. PMTA compliance expert Mr. K identified amendments and application ownership transfers as possible regulatory mechanisms, although neither has been confirmed in this case. Separately, Reynolds' $7.5 million acquisition of 16 PACHA products and related assets illustrates the commercial value of products linked to historic PMTA submissions.
Special Report
Oct.22
Reynolds Puts Nearly 183,000 U.S. Contracted Outlets Under Age-Verification Rules, Covering 94% of Volume — Can It Shift an Unauthorized Vape Market?
Reynolds Puts Nearly 183,000 U.S. Contracted Outlets Under Age-Verification Rules, Covering 94% of Volume — Can It Shift an Unauthorized Vape Market?
Reynolds American says nearly 183,000 U.S. retail outlets are under contract, with its Retail Marketing Plan Contract covering about 94% of company volume and requiring point-of-sale age verification. The company combines those contracts with We Card, TruAge, NACS-linked infrastructure and POS integration, while enhanced Vuse Pro retail rules add ID scanning, purchase limits and stronger underage-sales accountability. The initial Vuse Pro rollout targets about 50,000 stores. The system is taking shape as unauthorized vapor products remain dominant in parts of the U.S. market: a 2026 study estimated they accounted for 69.4% of tracked brick-and-mortar e-cigarette dollar sales in December 2025.
Special Report
Oct.15