Judges on a U.S. appeals court questioned lawyers for Philip Morris International Inc. (PMI) on the company’s attempt to overturn a decision banning imports of its IQOS devices based on patent claims by rival R.J. Reynolds, reports Reuters.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit expressed skepticism of PMI’s argument that the U.S. International Trade Commission should have consulted more with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration before imposing the ban.
The case is part of a global patent dispute between R.J. Reynolds’ parent company British American Tobacco and tobacco giant Altria Group Inc, from which PMI spun off in 2008.
Altria won USD 95 million in September from a North Carolina jury because R.J. Reynolds’ Vuse e-cigarettes infringed its patents. PMI won more than USD 10 million from a Virginia jury in June in a separate patent case over RJR’s Vuse line.
R.J. Reynolds sued Philip Morris at the ITC in 2020. Its related patent case against Philip Morris in Virginia is on hold.
The FDA had deemed IQOS beneficial to public health because it releases fewer toxins than traditional cigarettes. PMI’s attorney Gregory Garre of Latham & Watkins argued that the ITC’s public request for comment on its order did not amount to “consulting” with the FDA as required by federal law, the report said.