throbber
Jamie D. Underwood
`Direct: +1.202.637.3365
`jamie.underwood@lw.com
`
`April 23, 2020
`
`BY EDIS
`
`The Honorable Lisa R. Barton
`Secretary to the Commission
`U.S. International Trade Commission
`500 E Street, S.W., Room 112
`Washington, DC 20436
`
`555 Eleventh Street, N.W., Suite 1000
`Washington, D.C. 20004-1304
`Tel: +1.202.637.2200 Fax: +1.202.637.2201
`www.lw.com
`
`FIRM / AFFILIATE OFFICES
`Beijing
`Moscow
`Boston
`Munich
`Brussels
`New York
`Century City
`Orange County
`Chicago
`Paris
`Dubai
`Riyadh
`Düsseldorf
`San Diego
`Frankfurt
`San Francisco
`Hamburg
`Seoul
`Hong Kong
`Shanghai
`Houston
`Silicon Valley
`London
`Singapore
`Los Angeles
`Tokyo
`Madrid
`Washington, D.C.
`Milan
`
`Re:
`
`Certain Tobacco Heating Articles and Components Thereof,
`ITC Docket No. 337-TA-3447
`
`Dear Secretary Barton:
`
`Enclosed please find as a courtesy filing the Public Interest Comments of the Smoke-Free
`Alternatives Trade Association.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/s/ Jamie D. Underwood
`
`Jamie D. Underwood
`of LATHAM & WATKINS LLP
`
`Enclosure
`
`cc:
`
`Service List
`
`Philip Morris Products, S.A.
`Exhibit 1049
`PMP v. RAI
`IPR2020-00919
`
`Ex. 1049-001
`
`

`

`
`Smoke-Free Alternatives Trade Association
`1155 F Street NW
`Suite 1050
`Washington, DC 20004
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Docket No. 3447
`
`April 20, 2020
`
`VIA EDIS
`
`The Honorable Lisa R. Barton
`Secretary to the Commission
`U.S. International Trade Commission
`500 E Street, SW, Room 112
`Washington, DC 20436
`
`
`
`Dear Secretary Barton:
`
`
`
`
`
`Re: Certain Tobacco Heating Articles and Components Thereof
`
`The Smoke-Free Alternatives Trade Association (“SFATA”) submits the
`
`following comments to the U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC”) in response to
`
`the Public Interest Statement filed on April 15, 2020, in the Federal Registry, Volume 85
`
`No. 73. Complainants ask the ITC to issue a limited exclusion order, cease and desist
`
`orders and other requirements, during the 60-day Presidential Review period pursuant to
`
`19 U.S.C. 1337(j). The request would affect the U.S. market on all IQOS heat not burn
`
`(“HNB”) systems.
`
`
`
`SFATA believes that while electronic cigarettes and vapor products provide
`
`significant harm reduction products in the battle against death and disease from smoking,
`
`HNB systems also offer significant alternatives to traditional combustible tobacco
`
`products, including cigarettes. Additionally, this measure would harm competitive
`
`conditions in the United States for smoke free alternative products, frustrate choices for
`
`Docket No. 3447
`
`
`
`1
`
`Ex. 1049-002
`
`

`

`
`Smoke-Free Alternatives Trade Association
`1155 F Street NW
`Suite 1050
`Washington, DC 20004
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`consumers who want to switch from using cigarettes and stifle innovation in a space that
`
`has the potential to save many lives.
`
`
`
`SFATA, a 501(c)(6) organization, is a national trade association of businesses that
`
`work in, or in service of, the electronic vapor products industry, including manufacturers,
`
`distributors and retailers. SFATA’s core mission is to advocate for a reasonably regulated
`
`U.S. marketplace which allows its member companies to provide smoke-free reduced
`
`harm alternative products to smoking adult consumers, while promoting a positive and
`
`truthful public image for vapor products and educating businesses and policy makers
`
`regarding our industry.
`
`Factors influencing Remedial Order That are in Accordance with Public Interest
`
`SFATA cannot comment on the underlying merits of the allegations in the above
`
`referenced litigation. Nevertheless, SFATA recognizes there is a strong public interest in
`
`protecting intellectual property rights and strongly recommends that members utilize this
`
`tool in their own businesses. The protection of intellectual property rights provides
`
`businesses with a climate of predictability, encourages innovation, investment and the
`
`exchange of technology and property rights. While these allegations made by the
`
`complainants are significant, SFATA cannot support the removal of the subject HNB
`
`products by the ITC.
`
`
`
`Docket No. 3447
`
`
`
`2
`
`Ex. 1049-003
`
`

`

`
`Smoke-Free Alternatives Trade Association
`1155 F Street NW
`Suite 1050
`Washington, DC 20004
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Exclusion of HNB Products Would Frustrate Market Conditions for Consumers
`
`
`
` The electronic vapor industry considers the subject IQOS products to be
`
`competition to its inhalable vapor products. At its core, the electronic vapor industry has
`
`always recognized the issue that combustible tobacco products pose significant health
`
`issues to the consumer in the long term. With this in mind, not all consumers find
`
`electronic vapor products to be an acceptable alternative to conventional smoking.
`
`However, heated tobacco products, including HNB products, hold promise for Americans
`
`who are trying to quit/reduce traditional cigarette smoking. SFATA therefore believes
`
`there is a strong need for a ready availability of several alternative products to help
`
`smokers in accomplishing their goal, including IQOS. The ITC removing IQOS
`
`products from the U.S. market will severely limit smokers who have already found such
`
`products to be an aid to reducing/quitting cigarettes. While one HNB tobacco product
`
`has undergone the FDA’s Substantial Equivalence (“SE”) process, only IQOS has been
`
`authorized by the FDA through the Pre-Market Tobacco Application (“PMTA”) pathway,
`
`which requires a finding that the product is appropriate for the protection of public health.
`
`
`
`PMTA clearance is required for any new HNB tobacco product, and that process
`
`could take years to complete, exclusion would result in one product only be available for
`
`an indeterminate period. Further, having no choice in HNB tobacco products could
`
`increase prices, causing many tobacco users to return to traditional cigarettes or turning to
`
`the black market.
`
`Docket No. 3447
`
`
`
`3
`
`Ex. 1049-004
`
`

`

`
`Smoke-Free Alternatives Trade Association
`1155 F Street NW
`Suite 1050
`Washington, DC 20004
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`SFATA believes that consumer choice is at the heart of the solution in helping
`
`smoking adults’ transition to alternative products that potentially provide for harm
`
`reduction. Every consumer is different, and thus no one particular flavor or product is the
`
`sole solution to helping consumers transition away from combustible tobacco. In
`
`addition, reducing the U.S. market to a single supplier would foster the very monopolistic
`
`practices Congress and the ITC have sought to prevent.1
`
`Exclusion of IQOS Would Stifle Innovation in the Reduced Risk Product Space
`
`
`
`Encouraging the development of non-combustible products would stimulate
`
`innovation in a space that has the potential to save many lives. As more Americans than
`
`ever seek to quit traditional cigarette smoking, companies and individuals interested in
`
`creating innovative alternative tobacco products are weighing the costs/benefits of
`
`participating in the U.S. market. In SFATA’s view, if the U.S. market continues to be too
`
`expensive and uncertain, it will reduce the probability that companies will attempt to
`
`keep their current products on the market as well as bring new products to market. IQOS
`
`has undergone the FDA’s robust review process. Excluding a product already authorized,
`
`with the potential to help millions of smokers, even if temporarily, sends the wrong
`
`public health message and stifles the introduction of new solutions. Policies encouraging
`
`
`
`
`1 See Certain Automatic Crankpin Grinders, Inv. No. 337-TA-60, Alberger, Bedell, and Stern
`Comm’n Op. at 18 (Dec. 1979).
`
`Docket No. 3447
`
`
`
`4
`
`Ex. 1049-005
`
`

`

`
`Smoke-Free Alternatives Trade Association
`1155 F Street NW
`Suite 1050
`Washington, DC 20004
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`the availability of affordable health innovations is central to the FDA’s mission – and one
`
`the ITC should support.
`
`
`
`SFATA respectfully requests that the ITC weigh these public interest harms when
`
`assessing whether public interest issues should be delegated to the assigned
`
`Administrative Law Judge. SFATA appreciates the ITC’s attention to this matter.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`Mark Anton
`Executive Director
`
`
`
`Docket No. 3447
`
`
`
`5
`
`Ex. 1049-006
`
`

`

`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`337-TA-3447
`
`It is hereby certified that copies of PUBLIC INTEREST COMMENTS were served on
`April 23, 2020 as follows:
`
`
`By EDIS
`
`The Honorable Lisa R. Barton
`Secretary to the Commission
`U.S. International Trade Commission
`500 E Street, SW, Room 112
`Washington, DC 20436
`
`David M. Maiorana
`Ryan B. McCrum
`JONES DAY
`901 Lakeside Avenue
`Cleveland, OH 44114
`
`Stephanie E. Parker
`JONES DAY
`1420 Peachtree Street, N.E.
`Suite 800
`Atlanta, GA 30309
`
`Anthony M. Insogna
`JONES DAY
`4655 Executive Drive
`Suite 1500
`San Diego, CA 92121
`
`John J. Normile
`JONES DAY
`250 Vesey Street
`New York, NY 10281
`Tel: (212) 326-3939
`
`On Behalf of Complainants RAI Strategic
`Holdings, Inc., R.J. Reynolds Vapor Company, and
`R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company
`
`
`
`
`By Email
`dmaiorana@jonesday.com
`rbmccrum@jonesday.com
`separker@jonesday.com
`aminsogna@jonesday.com
`jjnormile@jonesday.com
`
`
`
`/s/ Erika J. Weinstein
`Erika J. Weinstein
`LATHAM & WATKINS LLP
`
`
`
`
`
`Ex. 1049-007
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket