Cannabis: In Focus
Continue Reading Cannabis Legal Report—Week of March 20, 2023
Cannabis: In Focus
DEA Classifies Two Lab-Derived Cannabinoids as Schedule I
The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) determined that two lab-derived cannabinoids— delta-8 THC acetate ester (delta-8 THCO) and delta-9 acetate ester (delta-9 THCO)—do not meet the federal definition
Cannabis: In Focus
Continue Reading Cannabis Legal Report—Week of February 13, 2023
Cannabis: In Focus
Continue Reading Cannabis Legal Report—Week of January 30, 2023
The District Court for the Western District of New York denied a motion on January 6, 2023, to dismiss claims alleging that a publicly traded company misled investors regarding an investigation by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The company, 22nd Century, engineers cannabis plants to regulate their levels of cannabinoids. The court’s denial of the motion to dismiss is an important reminder to companies, especially those in the cannabis space, about the importance of compliance and disclosure.
Continue Reading New York Cannabis Co. Investor Suit Survives Motion To Dismiss
Cannabis: In Focus
Continue Reading Cannabis Legal Report – Week of October 3, 2022
A California state appeals court affirmed a bong maker’s win in a suit alleging it violated California’s Proposition 65 (Prop. 65) by failing to warn consumers that its products expose them to marijuana smoke that could cause cancer or reproductive harm.
Prop. 65 is a California initiative approved by voters in 1986 and enacted into law as the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act that same year. The law prohibits knowingly and intentionally causing exposure to substances, including cannabis smoke and delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), that are known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive harm, without first providing a clear and reasonable warning. California maintains a list of substances that trigger Prop. 65 warnings. To comply with Prop. 65, businesses must provide consumers with a compliant warning, unless they can ensure that their product does not expose consumers to a listed substance at levels that may cause cancer or reproductive harm.
Plaintiff-appellant Environmental Health Advocates, Inc. (EHA) filed a private enforcement action against Sream, Inc. (Sream) on November 12, 2020, alleging Sream violated Prop. 65 when Sream failed to provide a warning that their water pipe products—more commonly known as bongs—exposed consumers to marijuana smoke. EHA’s enforcement action sought “injunctive relief against Sream, from manufacturing, importing, selling, and/or distributing the products without a clear and reasonable warning.”
Continue Reading California State Appeals Court Affirms Bong Maker’s Win in Prop. 65 Suit
Cannabis companies are facing a slew of class action lawsuits under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), which prohibits unwanted automated calls and text messages. In Facebook, Inc. v. Duguid et al., the U.S. Supreme Court provided some clarity that stakeholders have been awaiting since 2015 by adopting a narrower interpretation of the term
California regulators have proposed new tailored Proposition 65 warnings for cannabis products. These proposals would create new warning requirements for such products sold to California consumers containing THC or exposing consumers to cannabis smoke and—taken together with other proposed regulations—indicate that the Proposition 65 landscape may see some significant changes in the coming months.
Perkins Coie is pleased to announce that its fifth annual Food Litigation Year in Review, in coordination with the expansion of the firm’s practice, has been broadened and renamed the Food & Consumer Packaged Goods Litigation Year in Review. With this rebranding, we have featured a section on the latest cannabis litigation trends.
Continue Reading Food & Consumer Packaged Goods Litigation Year in Review 2020