Archive for March, 2011

Kessler Lets BAT Fly

Monday, March 28th, 2011

ORDER #16 (PDF)
ORDER #16 Memorandum Opinion (PDF)
EXCERPTS:
This civil action brought by the United States under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-1968, is now before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Defendant British American Tobacco (Investments) Limited’s (“BATCo’s”) Compliance and Defendant BATCo’s Motion for Reconsideration. Upon consideration of […]

CIVIL DOCKET FOR USA v. PHILIP MORRIS USA, et al March 28, 2011

Monday, March 28th, 2011

Date Filed # Docket Text
03/28/2011 5900 ORDER #16 granting in part and denying in part 5847 Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel; and granting in part and denying in part 5849 Defendant BATCo’s Motion for Reconsideration (see Order for details). Signed by Judge Gladys Kessler on 3/28/11. (CL, ) (Entered: 03/28/2011)
03/28/2011 5901 MEMORANDUM OPINION to Order #16. Signed by Judge Gladys […]

UNITED STATES’ OPENING BRIEF ON DEFENDANTS’ RULE 60(b) MOTION TO CLOSE THE MINNESOTA DEPOSITORY - March 24, 2011

Thursday, March 24th, 2011

The PDF is HERE
EXCERPT:
As one of its transparency remedies, the Court ordered Defendants to maintain the Minnesota Depository until 2021. Defendants did not challenge the Court’s Minnesota Depository remedy in their post-judgment motion for clarification or for relief from the judgment; did not object to keeping the Minnesota Depository and their document websites open the […]

CIVIL DOCKET FOR USA v. PHILIP MORRIS USA, et al March 17-24, 2011

Thursday, March 24th, 2011

Date Filed # Docket Text
03/21/2011 5892 MOTION for Leave to File Surreply Brief in Opposition to re 5854 United States’ Motion for Clarification Regarding Defendants’ Obligation To Produce Disaggregated Marketing Data by ALTRIA GROUP, INC., BRITISH AMERICAN TOBACCO., P.L.C., BROWN & WILLIAMSON TOBACCO CORPORATION, LORILLARD TOBACCO COMPANY, PHILIP MORRIS USA INC., R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY (Attachments: # […]

Tobacco Files Motion to Close MN Depository

Thursday, March 24th, 2011

EXCERPTS:
As set forth below, while the Minnesota Depository costs approximately $1,000,000 annually to maintain, it is rarely used. Moreover, in light of technological advancements, the Depository no longer serves the original purposes for which it was created and is now a mere redundancy. Accordingly, because there is no credible reason for continuing to maintain the […]

UNITED STATES’ REPLY TO DEFENDANTS’ AND INTERVENORS’ RESPONSES TO THE UNITED STATES’ SUBMISSION OF PROPOSED CORRECTIVE STATEMENTS AND EXPERT REPORT - March 16, 2011

Friday, March 18th, 2011

The PDF is HERE
EXCERPTS:
Rather than show that the United States’ proposed corrective statements are improper, Defendants’ brief demonstrates their true objection to the United States’ recommended corrective statements: They reject this Court’s findings that they engaged in a RICO conspiracy for decades to mislead and defraud the American people”to deadly effect. Those findings remain […]

PUBLIC HEALTH INTERVENORS’ REPLY TO DEFENDANTS’ RESPONSE TO THE GOVERNMENT’ PROPOSED CORRECTIVE STATEMENTS - March 16, 2011

Friday, March 18th, 2011

The PDF is HERE
EXCERPTS:
After an extensive trial and thousands of factual findings, the Court has concluded that Defendants engaged in a decades-long campaign to, inter alia, “repeatedly, consistently, vigorously “ and falsely “ den[y] the existence of any adverse health effects from smoking.” Given these conclusions, directly worded corrective statements “ i.e., the statements […]

DEFENDANTS’ REPLY TO PUBLIC HEALTH INTERVENORS’ RESPONSE TO UNITED STATES SUBMISSION OF PROPOSED CORRECTIVE STATEMENTS AND EXPERT REPORT - March 16, 2011

Friday, March 18th, 2011

The PDF is HERE
EXCERPTS:
The majority of Intervenors’ Response is premature. Intervenors focus principally on the implementation of any corrective statements that this Court may order Defendants to disseminate. See Intervenors’ Resp. 7-18. But the Government itself does not address implementation issues in its corrective statements submission, and the Court did not direct the parties […]

UNITED STATES’ REPLY IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ OBLIGATION TO DISCLOSE DISAGGREGATED MARKETING DATA - March 14, 2011

Thursday, March 17th, 2011

The PDF is HERE
EXCERPT
It appears to the United States that the Court intended that Defendants would provide the United States with access to “[d]ata that has been broken down by type of marketing (including sales data), brand, geographical region (to the smallest level of geographic specificity maintained by each Defendant), type of promotion or […]

DEFENDANTS’ PRAECIPE REGARDING INDEPENDENT THIRD PARTIES WHO SHOULD BE ASKED TO FILE BRIEFS CONCERNING POINT-OF-SALE DISPLAYS - March 7, 2011

Thursday, March 17th, 2011

The PDF is HERE
EXCERPTS:
At the outset, Defendants point out that the D.C. Circuit’s mandate contemplates protecting the rights of third-party retailers, not, as the Government would propose, invading those rights by abrogating their contracts. Moreover, the Court has little if any authority to adjudicate the rights of third-party retailers, because the Government has […]