Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Federal Court Vacates FDA Deeming of Premium Cigars Subject to the Tobacco Control Act

By Azim Chowdhury & Josephine Hsu on August 15, 2023
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

On August 9, 2023, Judge Amit P. Mehta of the U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia issued a final Memorandum Opinion in Cigar Association of America et al. v. United States Food and Drug Administration et al., vacating the decision of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to deem premium cigars subject to the agency’s regulatory authority under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (TCA)[1].

The decision concludes a seven-year conflict between the cigar industry and FDA. As previously reported, FDA issued a Final Rule on August 8, 2016, deeming all products meeting the statutory definition of a “tobacco product” to be subject to its regulatory authority, including premium cigars (“Deeming Rule”). In the preceding rulemaking phase, the Cigar Association of America (CAA), the Cigar Rights of America (CRA), and the Premium Cigar Association (PCA) had submitted comments to FDA regarding the usage patterns of premium cigar consumers, asserting that premium cigars did not pose the same type of public health concerns as other tobacco products. Nonetheless, in the Federal Register notice for the Deeming Rule, FDA asserted that no data had been provided to support different usage patterns and public health concerns. 

The CAA, CRA, and PCA subsequently challenged the Final Rule in federal court. In July of 2022, the Court held that FDA’s decision to deem premium cigars was arbitrary and capricious, insofar as that FDA failed to consider data before it concerning the use of premium cigars and the health effects of such use and requested further briefing from the parties on potential remedies. Since then, Plaintiffs have requested that the Court vacate the Deeming Rule, while FDA has requested that the Court remand the decision without vacating it, a remedy that is typically reserved only for exceptional circumstances. Relevant case law dictates that a court must consider two factors: first, the seriousness of the rule’s deficiencies; and second, the disruptive consequences of vacating the rule. 

With regard to the first factor, FDA argued that the Deeming Rule had minimal deficiencies that could be cured by (1) addressing existing record evidence on remand and (2) elaborating further on other rationales supporting the deeming of premium cigars, including concerns about secondhand smoke and usage among young adults. The Court rejected both arguments, finding that FDA’s decision to ignore relevant data in the first instance was a significant enough error to support vacatur, and that FDA could not separate other potential rationales for deeming premium cigars from the fundamental failure to consider relevant data on usage patterns and health effects. 

As to the second factor, FDA argued (1) that vacating the Deeming Rule would leave premium cigars entirely unregulated at the federal level, including in terms of sales to youths and false or misleading advertising; (2) that maintaining the status quo would not impose significant burdens on manufacturers of premium cigars; and (3) that vacatur would invite litigation about FDA’s user fee scheme, which funds the regulation of all tobacco products. The Court acknowledged the importance of these concerns, but ultimately found that none of the consequences, alone or in combination, were disruptive enough to warrant remand without vacatur. The Court specifically noted that while premium cigars may not be regulated at the federal level, all 50 states prohibit the sale of premium cigars to individuals under 18 years of age, with the majority of states prohibiting sales to individuals under 21 years of age, and that FDA itself had noted that premium cigars were the agency’s lowest enforcement priority relative to other tobacco products used with greater frequency by youths. 

Upon consideration of the two factors, the Court found that FDA had not carried its burden to establish extraordinary circumstances that might displace the default remedy of vacatur. Thus, the Court has vacated the Deeming Rule insofar as it applies to premium cigars, as requested by the Plaintiffs. Significantly, the Court defined premium cigars as those that (1) are wrapped in whole tobacco leaf; (2) contain a 100% leaf tobacco binder; (3) contain at least 50% (of the filler by weight) long filter tobacco; (4) are handmade or hand rolled; (5) have no filter, nontobacco tip, or nontobacco mouthpiece; (6) do not have a characterizing flavor other than tobacco; (7) contain only tobacco, water, and vegetable gum with no other ingredients or additives; and (8) weigh more than six pounds per 1,000 units. 

The Department of Justice now has an opportunity to appeal this decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit, so stay tuned for further updates.


[1] See Cigar Association of America et al. v. United States Food and Drug Administration et al., Case No. 1:16-cv-01460-APM (D.D.C.) (August 9, 2023). 

Photo of Azim Chowdhury Azim Chowdhury

Azim Chowdhury is a regulatory and public policy attorney with a focus on vapor, nicotine and tobacco product regulation. He is a Partner in Keller and Heckman’s nationally-ranked food and drug law practice.

Mr. Chowdhury advises domestic and foreign corporations in matters of…

Azim Chowdhury is a regulatory and public policy attorney with a focus on vapor, nicotine and tobacco product regulation. He is a Partner in Keller and Heckman’s nationally-ranked food and drug law practice.

Mr. Chowdhury advises domestic and foreign corporations in matters of Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and international regulatory compliance. In particular, he has developed expertise in tobacco and vapor product regulation relating to the implementation of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, and spearheaded the Tobacco and E-Vapor practice at Keller and Heckman. Specifically, Mr. Chowdhury has experience representing tobacco, e-cigarette and e-liquid manufacturers, distributors, retailers, suppliers and trade associations in matters of FDA, state and global regulatory compliance. He also assists corporations in establishing clearances for food and drug additives in the U.S., Canada, and European Union, with an emphasis on indirect additives used in food-contact materials.

Mr. Chowdhury has authored and edited numerous articles and publications, including Tobacco Regulation and Compliance: An Essential Resource, FDA Regulation of Tobacco: A Comprehensive Guide – An FDLI Primer and Tobacco and Nicotine Delivery: Regulation and Compliance, 2nd Edition. He is a frequent contributor to the Food and Drug Law Institute’s (FDLI) Update Magazine and has served on the Editorial Advisory Board of the Food and Drug Law Journal.  In addition, he has been interviewed in the U.S. News and World Reports Best Lawyers Edition (2016) and was named one of “10 Names to Know in the Vape World” in the October 2015 issue of Vape Magazine. Mr. Chowdhury received the 2018 National Law Review Go-To Thought Leadership Award for his consistent coverage of the emerging issues surrounding vaping and e-cigarettes on Keller and Heckman’s law blog, The Continuum of Risk.  As an industry leader, Mr. Chowdhury frequently speaks at industry conferences and events.

Mr. Chowdhury also has an active pro bono practice through Keller and Heckman’s Pro Bono Program, and has been featured in the Baltimore Sun for successfully obtaining asylum in the United States for a family who fled their home country of El Salvador because of violence they faced from an international gang.

Prior to entering private practice, he served as a judicial law clerk on the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland. Mr. Chowdhury received a B.A. and B.S. from Johns Hopkins University, a MBA from the University of Maryland Robert H. Smith School of Business, and a JD, cum laude, from the University of Maryland School of Law.

Education: Johns Hopkins University (B.A., B.S., 2003); University of Maryland Robert H. Smith School of Business (M.B.A., 2006); University of Maryland School of Law (J.D., 2006, cum laude).

Admissions: District of Columbia; Maryland

Read more about Azim ChowdhuryEmailAzim's Linkedin ProfileAzim's Twitter Profile
Show more Show less
Photo of Josephine Hsu Josephine Hsu
Read more about Josephine HsuEmailJosephine's Linkedin Profile
  • Posted in:
    Administrative and Regulatory, Food, Drug & Agriculture
  • Blog:
    The Continuum of Risk
  • Organization:
    Keller Heckman
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo