Tobacco On Trial

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 […]

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: # […]

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 […]

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 […]

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 […]

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 […]

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 […]

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 […]

The PDF is HERE
EXCERPTS:
the United States respectfully suggests that the Court solicit views from some or all of the following organizations regarding:
(1) The extent to which their members have protectable First Amendment, property, or other interests that might limit the Court’s ordering Defendants to require retail-program participants to display the Court’s corrective statements; and
(2) […]

03/14/2011 5888 REPLY to opposition to motion re 5854 MOTION for Clarification Regarding Defendants Obligation to Disclose Disaggregated Marketing Data filed by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. (Crane-Hirsch, Daniel) (Entered: 03/14/2011)
03/16/2011 5889 REPLY re 5883 to Public Health Intervenors’ Response to United States Submission of Proposed Corrective Statements and Expert Report filed by ALTRIA GROUP, INC., BRITISH AMERICAN […]