United States v. Philip Morris USA

CourtDistrict Court, District of Columbia
DecidedOctober 5, 2017
DocketCivil Action No. 1999-2496
StatusPublished

This text of United States v. Philip Morris USA (United States v. Philip Morris USA) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Philip Morris USA, (D.D.C. 2017).

Opinion

UNI'I`ED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR TI~IE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNI'I`ED STATES OF AMERICA,

Civil Aetion No. 99-CV-2496 (PLF) Next scheduled court appearance: NONE

Piaintiff, and

TOBACCO~FREE KIDS ACTION FUND, et al.

Plaintiff-Intervenors

PHILIP MORRIS USA INC., et al., Defehdants, and ITG BRANDS, LLC, et al.,

POSt-Judgment Parties Regarding Remedies. '

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) _) v.' ` ') ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

threw

ORDER # ;&:Remand

SECOND SUPERSEDING CONSENT ORDER IMPLEMENTING 'I`HE CORRECTIVE STATEMENTS REMEDY FOR NEWSPAPERS ANI) TELEVISION

Upon_ consideration of the Consent Motion for Entry of Second Superseding Consent 5

kc `D \*§'i~ . b 3..'2,3 Order Implementing the Corrective Statements Remedy for Newspapers and 'I`elevi§ion]§nd the

.»h¢. wman l.¢ G RHNTF-l§ ¢»\J¢ entire record herein, `t is hereby ORDERED that:

The corrective statements remedy under Order #1015 (Dkt. No. 5733; issued Aug. 17,

2006), published as United States v. Phl`lip Morris USA Inc., 449 F. Supp. 2d 1, 93 8-41 (D.D.C.

2006), ajj“'d fn part & vacated in part, 566 F.Bd 1095 (D.C.' Cir. 2009) (per curinm), cert denied,

561 U.S. 1025 (2010}, is hereby MODIFIED as set forth below:

n PART 1: REVISED TEXT FOR CORRECTIVE STATEMENTS As required by the Court oprpeais in Unfted Sfates v. Phi[ip Morris USA, Inc., 801 F.3d 250 (D.C. Cir. 2015), and Um'ted States v. th'lip Morrfs USA Inc., 855 F.3d 321 (D.C. Cir. 2017), and the memorandum opinions accompanying Order #62-Remand and Order #67-

Re_mand, the text of the Cozrectiv_e Staternents shall be as follows for Altria, R.J. Reynolds

Tobacco, Lorillard, and Philip Morris USA: A. Adverse Health Effects of Srnoking

A Federal Court has ordered Altria, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco, Lorillard, and Philip Mon'is USA1 to make this statement about the health effects of smoking

¢ Smoking kills, on average, 1`,200 Americans. Every day. `

¢ More people die every year from smoking than from murder, AIDS, suicide, drugs, car crashes, and alcohol, combined

¢ Smoking causes heart disease, emphysema, acute myeloid leukemia, and cancer ofthe mouth, esophagus, larynx, lung, stomach, kidney, bladder,` and pancreas.

¢ Srnoking also causes reduced fertility, low birth Weight in newborns, and cancer of the cervix.

B. Addictiveness of Smoking and Nicotine

A Federal Court has ordered Altria, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco, Lorillard, and Phiiip Morris USA to make this statement about the addictiveness of smoking and nicotine.

0 Smol

¢ Cigarette companies intentionally designed cigarettes with enough nicotine to create and sustain addiction

1 For all statements, wherever the company names are listed they will appear in the

sequence detailed in the substantive specifications below. 2

C.

It’s not easy to 'quit.

When you smoke, the nicotine actually changes the brain -~ that’s why quitting is so hard.

Lack of Signif"lcant Health Benefit from Smoking “Low Tar,” “Light,” “Ultra I..ight,” “Mild,” and “Natural” Cigarettes

A F ederal Court has ordered Altria, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco, Lorillard, and Philip Morris USA to make this statement about low tar and light cigarettes being as harmful as regular

cigarettes

I).

Many smokers switch to low tar and light cigarettes rather than quitting because they think low tar and light cigarettes are less harmful They are not.

“Low tar” and “light” cigarette smokers inhale essentially the same amount of tar and nicotine as they would from regular cigarettes

All cigarettes cause cancer, lung disease, heart attacks, and premature death - lights, low tar, ultra lights, and naturals. There is no safe cigarette

Manipulation of Cigarette Design and Composition to Ensure Optimum Nicotine Delivery

A Federal Court has ordered Altria, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco, Lorillard, and Philip Morris USA to make this statement about designing cigarettes to enhance the delivery of

nicotine.

E.

Altria, R..l. Reynolds Tobacco, Lorillard, and Philip Morris USA intentionally designed cigarettes to make them more addictive.

Cigarette companies control the impact and delivery of nicotine in many ways, including designing filters and selecting cigarette paper to maximize the ingestion of nicotine, adding ammonia to make the cigarette taste less harsh, and controlling the physical and chemical make-up of the tobacco blend.

When you smoke, the nicotine actually changes the brain - that’s why quitting is so hard. -

Adverse Health Effects of Exposure to Secondhand Smokc

A Federal Court has ordered Altria, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco, Lorillard, and Philip Morris USA to make this statement about the health effects of secondhand smoke.

Secondhand smoke kills over 38,000 Americans each year. 3

0 Secondhand smoke causes lung cancer and coronary heart disease in adults who do not smoke.

» Children exposed to secondhand smoke are at an increased risk for sudden infant death syndrome (SII)S), acute respiratory infections, ear problems, severe asthma, and reduced lung function

¢ There is` no safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke.

PART 2: REVISED IMPLEMENTATION SPECIFICATIONS FOR CORREC'I`IVE STATEMENTS FOR NEWSPAPERS AND TELEVISION

I. ])ef'initions

A. “Benchmark timeslot” for a particular month means the timeslot that received the fewest average impressions (18-99+) among CBS, ABC, and NBC, Monday through 'l`hursday, between~'!:OO p.m. and 9:59 p.m., during the most recent three~month period that ended a full

month before the month in question.

B. “Corrective Statements” or “Statements” mean the text of the statements set forth in Part l above l l

C. “Defendants” means Altria, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, Lorillard Tobacco Company, and Philip Morris USA. ` 'l`o the extent any obligations under this Second Superseding Consent Order Implementing the Corrective Statements Remedy for Newspapers and Television pertaining to Loriilard-Tobacco Company have been transferred to R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, as contemplated by the Notice ofTransaction Involving Defs. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company and Lorillard Tobacco Company (Dkt. No. 6141; filed Apr. 7, 2015), such obligations shall apply to R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company. The obligations of the Remedies Parties as a result of that transaction and Order #56~Remand (Dkt. No. 6151; issued June 8, 2015), are set out

in Order #56-Remand and Order #64-Rernand (Dkt. No. 6195; issued April I9, 2016).

D. “Defendant” means the individual company that is making the Corrective

Statement.

E. “Exhibit,” unless the context indicates otherwise, will refer to exhibits filed with the Consent Motion (iiled October 2, 2017) for Entry of Second Superseding Consent Order Implementing Corrective Statements Remedy for Newspapers and Television.

F. “Remedies Parties” refers to ITG Brands, LLC (“ITG Brands”), Commonwealth Brands, Inc. (“Commonwealth”), and Commonwealth-Altadis, Inc. (“Commonwealth-Altadis”),

G.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Philip Morris USA, Inc.
449 F. Supp. 2d 1 (District of Columbia, 2006)
United States v. Philip Morris USA Inc.
801 F.3d 250 (D.C. Circuit, 2015)
United States v. Philip Morris USA Inc.
855 F.3d 321 (D.C. Circuit, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Philip Morris USA, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-philip-morris-usa-dcd-2017.