Indirect purchasers' US vape antitrust case dismissed
( December 3, 2025, 00:10 GMT | Official Statement) -- MLex Summary: A US judge dismissed antitrust litigation brought by indirect purchasers of closed cannabis-oil vaporizer systems, stating that there are "several serious problems" with their second amended complaint. "For example, the plaintiffs have plainly failed to allege a Sherman Act Section 1 per se violation, but the complaint does not specify whether the plaintiffs are also pursuing a rule of reason claim," US District Judge Vince Chhabria wrote in an order. He added that the plaintiffs have also not explained how they have federal antitrust standing "given that they participate only in the market for filled cannabis vapes, which are illegal under federal law." The plaintiffs allege the defendants agreed to create a minimum price floor for the products, prevented the purchase of competing products, and shared price and customer information with one another. Chabbria gave the plaintiffs leave to amend, but he said they shouldn't "assume that the issues highlighted in this order cover all the problems with the complaint."See attached order....
Prepare for tomorrow’s regulatory change, today
MLex identifies risk to business wherever it emerges, with specialist reporters across the globe providing exclusive news and deep-dive analysis on the proposals, probes, enforcement actions and rulings that matter to your organization and clients, now and in the longer term.
Know what others in the room don’t, with features including:
Daily newsletters for Antitrust, M&A, Trade, Data Privacy & Security, Technology, AI and more
Custom alerts on specific filters including geographies, industries, topics and companies to suit your practice needs
Predictive analysis from expert journalists across North America, the UK and Europe, Latin America and Asia-Pacific
Curated case files bringing together news, analysis and source documents in a single timeline