Breeze Smoke, LLC v. FDA

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that “the FDA’s 2019 guidance does not qualify as ‘longstanding’”
• holding that “the FDA’s 2019 guidance does not qualify as ‘longstanding’”
• upholding the FDA’s determination that generalized evidence included in an open-system e-liquid application could not overcome the clear preference of children for flavored e-cigarettes
• “Considering all of Breeze Smoke’s evidence, we disagree with Breeze Smoke, and with our colleagues on the Fifth Circuit, who say that the FDA orchestrated a ‘surprise switcheroo.’”
• “declin[ing] to embrace” petitioner’s claim “that the FDA’s willingness to consider some forms of evidence, explicitly phrased as such, required the FDA to accept that evidence as meeting a statutory requirement even where the FDA found the evidence unsatisfactory”
• denying a judicial stay from a substantially similar marketing denial order

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).