Vail v. Juul Labs, Inc.

Filing 1

COMPLAINT Lisa Marie Vail, individually and on behalf of the Estate of Daniel David Wakefield, deceased against Juul Labs, Inc. ( Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0971-13790529.). Filed byLisa Marie Vail. (Attachments: #1 Criminal Cover Sheet Civil Case Covert Sheet)(Nehmens, Angela) (Filed on 10/15/2019)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

Rachel Abrams (CA Bar No. 209316)
Mahzad K. Hite (CA Bar No. 283043)
Sara Craig (CA Bar No. 301290)
Angela J. Nehmens (CA Bar No. 309433)
LEVIN SIMES ABRAMS LLP
1700 Montgomery Street, Suite 250
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

9
10

Attorneys for Plaintiff

11

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

12

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

13
14

Lisa Marie Vail, individually and on behalf of
Case No.:
the Estate of Daniel David Wakefield, deceased

15

Plaintiff,

16

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY
TRIAL

17

vs.

18

JUUL LABS, INC.; and DOES 1-30, inclusive,
Defendant.

19
20
21

COMES NOW Plaintiff, Lisa Marie Vail, individually and on behalf of the Estate of Daniel

22

David Wakefield, deceased (“Plaintiff”) by and through her undersigned counsel, and brings this

23

Complaint against Defendants JUUL Labs, Inc. and Does 1-30 and allege as follows:
I.

24
25

1.

INTRODUCTION

Daniel David Wakefield (“Wakefield”) was a healthy teenager whose life

26

tragically and prematurely ended due to injuries that were directly caused by his addiction to

27

JUUL®, an electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) or e-cigarette. On August 31, 2018,

28

Wakefield died in his sleep at the age of 18 after years of Juul use. Defendant JUUL Labs, Inc.’s

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 1

1

wrongful conduct in marketing, promoting, manufacturing, designing, and selling JUUL

2

substantially contributed to Wakefield’s death.
2.

3

In 2015, Defendant JUUL Labs, Inc. (hereinafter “Defendant” or “JUUL”) took

4

advantage of minimal regulations and loopholes for e-cigarettes at a time when youth smoking

5

was at its lowest level in decades. Defendant developed and marketed a highly addictive product

6

that could be packaged and sold to young people without having to comply with the restrictions

7

for regular cigarette companies. Teens are a highly sought-after market for cigarette companies

8

because they are most susceptible nicotine addiction and are more likely to become customers for

9

life.

10

3.

The JUUL device heats a nicotine filled liquid, delivered via JUULpods™ which

11

are sold separately from the device. JUULpods come in kid-friendly flavors like mango, cool

12

mint, fruit, and crème brûlée, each delivering a powerful potent dose of nicotine and other toxic

13

chemicals into the lungs, body, and brain of the JUULer.

14

4.

JUUL was designed for teenagers. It does not look, smell, or taste like a regular

15

cigarette. When the JUULer exhales, a sweet-smelling vapor lingers for only a few seconds

16

before dissipating, unlike the thick stench of traditional cigarette smoke. It is a small, trendy,

17

high-tech device that looks like a USB drive. It comes in various colors and styles, and

18

Defendant’s viral marketing campaigns use young models to make the products look cool and

19

stylish to young consumers.

20

5.

JUUL is easily concealable from parents and teachers that can be used practically

21

anywhere. Unlike traditional cigarettes, the scent does not linger on the body or in the breath of

22

the user, making it undetectable after use. Googling "hiding JUUL in school" or "how to ghost

23

rip JUUL" returns hundreds of videos on how to JUUL anywhere without detection.

24

6.

Defendant designed JUUL to addict young people to nicotine. Nicotine is one of

25

the most addictive chemicals in the world. By studying cigarette industry archives, Defendant

26

learned how to manipulate the nicotine in its products to maximize addictiveness, particularly

27

among new users and young people, and thereby increase sales. Defendant designed its products

28

to minimize the discomfort of traditional cigarettes by creating a product that does have a "throat

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 2

1

hit" or irritation that would serve as a natural deterrent to new users. The sole purpose of this

2

design element was to initiate new smokers, since those who already smoke cigarettes are tolerant

3

to the throat hit sensation and associate it with smoking and nicotine satisfaction. At the same

4

time, Defendant designed its device to deliver substantially higher concentrations of nicotine per

5

puff than traditional cigarettes and most other e-cigarettes. This combination of comfortable

6

inhalation and high nicotine delivery makes JUUL both powerfully addictive and dangerous.
7.

7

Nicotine is dangerous, particularly to young people whose brains are still

8

developing through age 25. Nicotine is not only addictive, but also permanently alters the

9

structure of the brain and causes permanent mood changes and other cognitive disorders.

10

8.

Nicotine addiction causes repeated exposure to the toxins and aerosols contained

11

in JUUL’s vapor.

12

9.

Several studies, including one recently released by the American Stroke

13

Association, have shown that e-cigarettes increase the risk of stroke, heart attack, and coronary

14

artery disease.1
10.

15

Other studies have shown that e-cigarettes containing nicotine significantly

16

increase blood pressure, heart rate, and arterial stiffness, and can also cause vascular damage,

17

which can lead to strokes and other cardiovascular injuries. These studies build on the well-

18

established research that nicotine increases blood pressure.
11.

19

E-cigarette vapor smoke contains substantial levels of fine particles which have

20

been previously linked to cigarette smoke and air pollution. Clinical studies have shown e-

21

cigarette use causes inflammation and increased airway resistance, often at levels similar to

22

effects of cigarette smoking. Studies have also found indicators of oxidative stress from e-

23

cigarette use and have found that e-cigarette vapor produces inflammatory responses and

24

increased susceptibility to infection.

25
26
27
1

28

Press Release, American Stroke Association, E-cigarettes Linked to Higher Risk of Stroke, Heart Attack, Diseased
Arteries, (Jan. 30, 2019).

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 3

12.

1
2

Studies have shown associations between e-cigarette use and respiratory use as

well as increased prevalence and severity of symptoms in asthma among adolescents.
13.

3

The United States Surgeon General has concluded that e-cigarettes, including

4

JUUL, are not safe for anyone under age 26.2 Despite this, Defendant targeted its marketing

5

towards young people.
14.

6

By following the guidance and methods of the cigarette industry, while

7

circumventing all regulations, Defendant marketed and promoted its highly addictive product

8

through social media and other platforms to capture the lucrative youth market. Defendant

9

profited from a product that would create a long-term nicotine addiction without warning teens

10

about risks of addiction, stoke, and other life-altering injuries. Defendant targeted, preyed and

11

exploited teenagers’ vulnerability by creating an extremely dangerous product and advertising it

12

as cool, fun, and safe.
15.

13

Since 2015 when JUUL hit the market, JUUL has become pervasive in schools

14

across the country and adolescent use is rampant. JUUL not only dominates the multi-billion-

15

dollar e-cigarette market, but also has expanded the size of that market significantly-mostly via

16

young non-smokers. The cigarette company Altria (formerly known as Philip Morris) acquired

17

a 35% stake in Defendant JUUL Labs, Inc., for $12.8 billion, giving Altria access to the new

18

generation of customers Defendant has groomed.
16.

19

JUUL created an epidemic. According to Alex Azar, the Secretary of the U.S.

20

Department of Health and Human Services, "We have never seen use of any substance by

21

America 's young people rise as rapidly as e-cigarette use is rising."3 Defendant’s conduct has

22

led to a surge in teen e-cigarette use, creating the "largest ever recorded [increase in substance

23
24
25
26
2

27

U.S. Surgeon General and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , Office on Smoking and Health,
https://e-cigarettes.surgeongeneral.gov/ (last visited August 5, 2019).
3

28

Press Release, Office of U.S. Surgeon General Vice Adm., Surgeon General Releases Advisory on E-Cigarette
Epidemic Among Youth (Dec. 18, 2018.)

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 4

1

abuse] in the past 43 years for any adolescent substance use outcome in the U.S."4 In a mere two

2

years, Defendant undid more than a decade of progress in reducing teen smoking, thereby

3

increasing use among teenagers to levels not seen since the early 2000s. Wakefield was a target

4

and victim of Defendant’s conduct.
II.

5

17.

6

PARTIES

Plaintiff Lisa Marie Vail, individually and on behalf of the Estate of Daniel David

7

Wakefield, deceased, is the natural mother of Daniel David Wakefield. Plaintiff is an adult citizen

8

of the State of Florida, residing at 3248 Broken Bow Drive, Land O Lakes, Florida 34639.
18.

9

Defendant JUUL Labs, Inc. (“JUUL”) is incorporated in Delaware with its

10

principal place of business in San Francisco, California. Prior to 2017, JUUL was known as PAX

11

Labs, Inc.

12

19.

13

cigarettes.

14

20.

15

JUUL manufactures, designs, sells, markets, promotes, and distributes JUUL e-

JUUL ratified each and every act or omission alleged herein in proximately causing

the injures and damages incurred by Wakefield and Plaintiff.
21.

16

Upon information and belief, DOES 1-10 are individuals and corporations with

17

their primary place of business or residence in California, or who directed their activities towards

18

the State of California and/or have minimum contacts with the State.
22.

19

Upon information and belief, DOES 1-10 provided scientific research and

20

development services to JUUL, in support of JUUL’s manufacture, design, sale, marketing,

21

promotion, and distribution of JUUL e-cigarettes.
23.

22

Upon information and belief, DOES 11-20 are individuals and corporations with

23

their primary place of business or residence in California, or who directed their activities towards

24

the State of California and/or have minimum contacts with the State.
24.

25

Upon information and belief, DOES 11-20 provided marketing services, including

26
27
4

28

Salynn Boyles, Surgeon General Calls for New
https://www.medpagetoday.com/primarycare/smoking/77000.

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 5

E-Cig

Restrictions

(Dec.

18,

2018)

1

but not limited to market analyses; advertising design, marketing, tools, techniques, and strategies;

2

data on potential target demographics; and other services in support of JUUL’s manufacture,

3

design, sale, marketing, promotion, and distribution of JUUL e-cigarettes.
25.

4

Upon information and belief, DOES 21-30 are individuals and corporations with

5

their primary place of business or residence in California, or who directed their activities towards

6

the State of California and/or have minimum contacts with the State.
26.

7

Upon information and belief, DOES 21-30 are members of the e-cigarette industry

8

that conspired with JUUL to fraudulently conceal and downplay the risks of e-cigarettes, engage

9

in a campaign of doubt, confusion, and misrepresentation, and overstated the benefits of e-

10

cigarettes and nicotine.
27.

11

Plaintiff is informed and believes and on that basis alleges that each defendant

12

named herein as DOES 1-30 are those persons, corporations, other legal entities, and/or successor-

13

in-interest of any of those entities described above whose wrongful conduct caused or contributed

14

to cause the harms, injuries, and damages to Plaintiff.
III.

15

28.

16

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

Defendant at all material times hereto was in the business of manufacturing,

17

designing, testing, assembling, supplying, selling, importing, and distributing the JUUL e-

18

cigarette device and JUULpods (hereinafter “JUUL PRODUCTS”) that are the subject of this

19

lawsuit.
29.

20

Plaintiff brings her complaint under federal diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28

21

U.S.C. 1332.

22

corporation with its principal place of business in San Francisco, California. Plaintiff is a Florida

23

resident. The amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.
30.

24

There is complete diversity between all parties.

Defendant is a Delaware

Venue is proper in this Court because Defendant’s principal place of business is

25

in the City and County of San Francisco, and much of the wrongful conduct alleged herein took

26

place in this City and County.

27

///

28

///

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 6

IV.

1

31.

2
3

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

JUUL e-cigarettes are small, USB shaped devices. Flavored JUULpods are

inserted into the JUUL and contains the “e-liquid” that is vaporized, or vaped.
A.

4

JUUL PRODUCTS are Highly Addictive and Unsafe for Individuals Under 26 Years

5

Old; However, they are Designed and Marketed Specifically to Entice Teenage Users,

6

Fostering a New Nicotine-Dependent Generation.

7

32.

In 1988, the United States Surgeon General released a report that stated (1)

8

cigarettes and other forms of tobacco are addictive; (2) nicotine is the drug in tobacco that causes

9

addiction; and (3) the physiological and behavioral processes that determine tobacco addiction

10

are similar to those that determine heroin and cocaine addiction.5
33.

11

The human brain is not fully developed until age 26. Nicotine from e-cigarettes,

12

like JUUL PRODUCTS, can lead to addiction, harm to brain development, and change the way

13

brain functions in users under the age of 26.6
34.

14
15

Nicotine is associated with and cardiovascular, reproductive, immune, and

pulmonary problems.

16

35.

17

cigarettes.7

18

36.

19

One JUUL pod contains at least as much nicotine as a pack of cigarettes, or 20

E-cigarettes significantly increase the risk of high blood pressure, arterial stiffness,

stroke, and heart attack.
37.

20

E-cigarette vapor smoke contains substantial levels of fine particles previously

21

implicated in pulmonary diseases. The e-cigarette vapor smoke produces oxidative stress and

22

inflammation in airways and increases risk of pulmonary disease.

23

significant increase in the prevalence of asthma in adolescent e-cigarette users.

Studies have found a

24
25
26
27
28

5

Neal L. Benowitz, Pharmacology of Nicotine: Addiction, Smoking-Induced Disease, and Therapeutics, 49
ANNUAL REVIEW OF PHARMACOLOGY AND TOXICOLOGY 57 (2009).
6
U.S Surgeon General and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , Office on Smoking and Health,
https://e-cigarettes.surgeongeneral.gov/ (last visited August 5, 2019).
7
https://truthinitiative.org/research-resources/emerging-tobacco-products/6-important-facts-about-juul

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 7

38.

1
2

Other studies have also found high prevalence of respiratory symptoms,

particularly asthma, in adolescents who use e-cigarettes.
39.

3

Nicotine affects neurological development in adolescents, and exposure to
8

4

nicotine during adolescence produces an increased vulnerability to nicotine addiction.

5

Adolescent nicotine addiction causes “substantial neural remodeling,” including those parts of the

6

brain governed by dopamine or acetylcholine, which play central roles in reward functioning and

7

cognitive function. Adolescent smokers are found to have weakened neural responses including

8

“diminished sensitivity to non-drug rewards.” 9 This effect becomes even more severe in

9

adolescents who smoke more than 5 cigarettes, or a quarter of a JUUL pod, per day.
40.

10

Other brain changes from nicotine include increased sensitivity to other drugs and

11

heightened impulsivity. “Brain imaging on adolescents suggest that those who begin smoking

12

regularly at a young age have markedly reduced activity in the prefrontal cortex and perform less

13

well on tasks related to memory and attention compared to people who don’t smoke.”10
41.

14

According to the National Institutes of Health, the “amount and speed of nicotine

15

delivery plays a critical role in the potential for abuse of tobacco products.”11 The cigarette

16

industry has long known that “nicotine is the addicting agent in cigarettes”12 and that “nicotine

17

satisfaction is the dominant desire” of nicotine addicts.13

18
19
20
8

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Mariam Arain et al., Maturation of The Adolescent Brain, 9 NEUROPSYCHIATRIC DISEASE AND TREATMENT
449 (2013).
9
Id.
10
Erin Brodwin, An E-Cigarette with Twice the Nicotine of Comparable Devices is Taking Over High Schools and Scientists are Sounding the Alarm, Business Insider (April 30, 2018), https://www.businessinsider.com/juule-cig-vaping-health-effects-2018-3.
11
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, HOW TOBACCO SMOKE CAUSES DISEASE: THE BIOLOGY AND
BEHAVIORAL
BASIS
FOR
SMOKING
ATTRIBUTABLE
TO
DISEASE
(2010)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK53018/.
12

Tobacco
Industry
Quotes
on
Nicotine
Addiction,
OK.GOV,
https://www.ok.gov/okswat/documents/Tobacco%20Industry%20Quotes%20on%20Nicotine%20Addiction.pdf (last
visited August 5, 2019).
13
Id.; John Schwartz, 1973 Cigarette Company Memo Proposed New Brands For Teens,
WASHINGTONPOST.COM (October 4, 1995) https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1995/10/04/1973cigarette-company-memo-proposed-new-brands-for-teens/eaf66416-3939-4c5f-9fbf1db1897673ab/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.d4d274af09a2.

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 8

42.

1

In U.S. patent No. 9,215,895 ("the '895 patent"), Defendant describes a process for

2

combining benzoic acids with nicotine to produce nicotine salts, a formulation that mimics the

3

nicotine salt additive developed by RJ Reynolds decades earlier.
43.

4

In a 2015 interview, Ari Atkins, Defendant’s research & development engineer

5

and one of the inventors of the JUUL device, said this about the role of acids: “In the tobacco

6

plant, there are these organic acids that naturally occur. And they help stabilize the nicotine in

7

such a way that makes it, I've got to choose the words carefully here: Appropriate for inhalation.”
44.

8

In creating JUUL PRODUCTS, Defendant lowers the pH of nicotine, which

9

prevents the harsh throat irritation usually associated with cigarettes. This reduction in pH

10

converts naturally occurring nicotine, which causes irritation in the throat and respiratory tract,

11

into salt nicotine.14

12

45.

13

A recent study found that Defendant’s e-liquid had a pH of under 6.0, suggesting

that the JUUL contains almost no freebase (non-salt) nicotine.15
46.

14

High overall nicotine levels and low freebase nicotine levels allow JUUL users to

15

vape aerosols with minimal harshness when they inhale.16 The study concluded “[t]his may well

16

contribute to the current prevalence of JUUL products among youth.”17
47.

17

Similarly, a recent study of JUULpods found that “[t]he nicotine levels delivered

18

by the JUUL are similar to or even higher than those delivered by cigarettes.”18 JUUL delivers

19

up to 36% more nicotine per puff than a Marlboro.19

20
21
22
14

23
24
25
26
27
28

Anna K. Duell, et at., Free Base Nicotine Determinations in Electronic Cigarette Liquids by 1H NMR Spectroscopy,
31(6) CHEM. RES. TOXICAL 431 (2018).
15
Id.
16
Id.
17
Id.
18
Samantha M. Reilly et al., Free Radical, Carbonyl, and Nicotine Levels Produced by JUUL Electronic
Cigarettes,
NICOTINE
AND
TOBACCO
RESEARCH,
(October
20,
2018),
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30346584.
19
E-Cigarettes, EC.EUROPA.EDU, https://ec.europa.eu/health/sites/health/files/tobacco/docs/fs_ecigarettes_en.pdf
(last visited August 5, 2019); Ronny Linder, JUUL Warns it Will Fight Israel Over Potential Ban on Its Ecigarettes, HAARETZ.COM (June 3, 2018 9:52 p.m.), https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/business/juul-warnsit-will-fight-israel-over-potential-ban-on-its-e-cigarettes-1.6140058.

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 9

48.

1

Because “nicotine yield is strongly correlated with tobacco consumption,” 20 a

2

JUUL pod with its greater absorbable nicotine will strongly correlate with higher rates of

3

consumption of JUULpods, generating more revenue for JUUL.
49.

4
5

potential than traditional cigarettes.21
50.

6
7

The high nicotine levels found in JUUL PRODUCTS create a greater addiction

JUUL PRODUCTS amplify the health risks associated with nicotine consumption

because their users receive a far more potent dose than if they smoked a traditional cigarette.
51.

8

The design of JUUL PRODUCTS allow them to be consumed anywhere.

9

Therefore, the traditional “smoke breaks” do not apply. Since a JUUL pod contains about 20

10

cigarettes and has no automatic off switch, JUUL users can inhale JUUL PRODUCTS regularly

11

without having to relight or grab another cigarette. Also, unlike cigarettes that have a definite

12

and natural stopping point, JUUL only stops when the device runs out of battery or the pod runs

13

out of liquid. This leads JUUL users to have less awareness of their total nicotine consumption

14

and a greater amount of nicotine consumed.
52.

15
16

from 11 to 21 percent in 2018.
53.

17
18
19

54.

In December 2018, Altria, the parent company of Philip Morris, purchased a 35

percent share of Defendant JUUL Labs, Inc. for 12.8 billion dollars.22

22
23

Sixty-three percent of JUUL users did not know JUULpods always contain

nicotine.
B.
Defendant’s Teen-Focused Business and Advertising Model is Derived from Tobacco
Giant, Philip Morris, Who Owns a 35 Percent Share of JUUL.

20
21

The amount of 12th grade students who reported vaping nicotine nearly doubled

55.

In 1998, the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement prevented Tobacco companies

from (1) using outdoor advertising such as billboards; (2) sponsoring events; (3) giving free

24
25
26
27
28

20

Martin J. Jarvis et al., Nicotine Yield From Machine Smoked Cigarettes and Nicotine Intakes in
Smokers: Evidence From a Representative Population Survey, 93-2 JOURNAL OF NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE
134 (2001).
21
Reilly, supra note 18.
22
Laural Wamsley, Altria Buys 35 Percent stake in E-Cigarette Maker Juul, NPR.ORG (December 20, 2018 6:18 p.m),
https://www.npr.org/2018/12/20/678915071/altria-buys-35-percent-stake-in-e-cigarette-maker-juul

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 10

1

samples; (4) paying any person “to use, display, may reference to or use as a prop any Tobacco

2

Products, Tobacco Product package…in any ‘media’ which includes any motion picture,

3

television show, theatrical production or other live performance, and any commercial film or

4

video;” and (5) paying any third party to conduct any activity which the tobacco manufacturer is

5

prohibit from doing.
56.

6
7

display over Times Square.23
57.

8
9
10

In 2015, Defendant launched its “Vaporized” campaign with a 12-panel billboard

In launching JUUL PRODUCTS, Defendant held at least 25 youth oriented JUUL

sampling events in major cities such as New York and Las Vegas, whose central purpose was to
distribute free samples of JUUL PRODUCTS to a youth audience.
58.

11

Defendant “deployed a sophisticated program to enter schools and convey its

12

messages directly to teenage children” by offering $10,000 to schools nationwide for the right to

13

talk to students in classrooms or after school.24
59.

14
15

week wellness camp for kids.25
60.

16
17

Defendant paid a Baltimore charter school organization $135,000 to set up a five-

Defendant has opened pop up “JUUL bars” in Los Angeles, New York, and the

Hamptons, imitating trendy pop-up shops and restaurants that attract young consumers.26
61.

18

Defendant specifically advertised JUUL PRODUCTS to impressionable teens by

19

spending more than $200,000 on online “influencers,” including celebrity chefs to provide pod

20

“pairing” suggestions.27

21
22
23

23
24
25
26
27
28

Robert K. Jackler, et al., Juul Advertising Over it First Three Years on the Market, STANFORD RESEARCH INTO THE
IMPACT
OF
TOBACCO
ADVERTISING
(January
31,
2019)
http://tobacco.stanford.edu/tobacco_main/publications/JUUL_Marketing_Stanford.pdf (last visited August 5, 2019).
24
Sheila Kaplan, Juul Targeted Schools and Youth Camps, House Panel on Vaping Claims, THE NEW YORK TIMES
(July 25, 2019) https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/25/health/juul-teens-vaping.html
25
Id.
26
Kathleen Chaykowski, The Disturbing Focus of Juul’s Early Marketing Campaigns, FORBES (Nov. 16, 2018 2:38
p.m), https://www.forbes.com/sites/kathleenchaykowski/2018/11/16/the-disturbing-focus-of-juuls-early-marketingcampaigns/#244eed1214f9
27
Letter from Raja Krishnamoorthi, Chairman for Subcommittee of Economic and Consumer Policy, to Kevin Burns,
CEO of JUUL Labs, Inc. (June 7, 2019) (on file with United States House of Representatives Committee on Oversight
and Reform).

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 11

62.

1

Between 2015 and 2018, Defendant sent at least 200 promotional emails to

2

customers and potential customers, regardless of age. These emails included coupons for the

3

“starter kit” and a “refer a smoker” program.
63.

4

Defendant’s emails also included surveys consumers could take it exchange for

5

compensation, regardless of age. In some cases, Defendant paid customers up to $30 to complete

6

those surveys.
64.

7

In 2006, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia issued a

8

decision in United States v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., after the federal government alleged big

9

tobacco violated and continued to violate the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act

10

(“RICO”) through its decades-long targeting of adolescents by using peer marketing, images and

11

themes that appealed to teens, and promotional materials that would specifically reach them. The

12

court found “overwhelming” evidence that tobacco companies intentionally exploited adolescents’

13

vulnerability to imagery by creating and advertising themes of independence, adventurousness,

14

sophistication, glamour, athleticism, social inclusion, sexual attractiveness, thinness, popularity,

15

rebelliousness, and being “cool.” United States v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., 449 F. Supp. 2d 1,

16

571 (D.D.C. 2006).
65.

17

JUUL’s “Vaporized” campaign promoted JUUL products to teens in a strikingly

18

similar fashion, using young, trendy models and bold colors, and showing JUUL products as

19

being an essential part of a young, fun, and cool lifestyle.28
66.

20

Defendant’s print advertisements continued the themes of the “Vaporized”

21

campaign by showing young, attractive, trendy models having fun by “juuling.”

These

22

advertisements preyed on teenage vulnerability by making it seem like “juuling” would make

23

someone attractive, popular, independent, fun, and cool.

24
25
26
27
Declan Harty, Juul Hopes to Reinvent E-cigarette Ads with ‘Vaporized’ Campaign, ADAGE (June 23, 2015)
https://adage.com/article/cmo-strategy/juul-hopes-reinvent-e-cigarette-ads-campaign/299142
28

28

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 12

67.

1

Defendant primarily advertised through social media.

It hired social media

2

“influencers”29 to promote JUUL PRODUCTS and to influence teens to use them. Up until 2018,

3

Defendant called for “influencers” 30 with a “join the JUUL influencers” link on its website.

4

Applicants were required to disclose their Instagram, Twitter, blog, and Facebook profiles for

5

Defendant to assess if they could successfully reach the target teen market.
68.

7

10

#JUUL, #JUULnation, #Mango, and #Coolmint. Additionally, Defendant allowed other accounts
like @JUULnation to post tips and videos about “juuling,” including how to “juul in school.”
70.

11
12

As of August 1, 2018, #juul has over 552,000 posts, #juulnation has over 57,200

posts, and #juulvapor has over 48,500 posts on Instagram.
71.

13
14

Defendant used hashtags to reach the teen market, including, but not limited to,

teens.

8
9

These “influencers” delivered the JUUL message to hundreds of thousands of

69.

6

In 2009, the FDA banned flavored cigarettes because “flavored cigarettes are a

gateway for many children and young adults to become regular smokers.”31
72.

15

According to a recent study, 74 percent of teens indicated the first JUUL product

16

they used was a flavored pod. Additionally, more than half of teens stated that they use e-

17

cigarettes, such as JUUL, because they like the flavors.
73.

18
19

A 2018 study found JUUL’s “cool mint” pod had nearly double the amount of

nicotine than the 5% strength label indicates.32
74.

20

Defendant had an advertising campaign titled “Save Room for JUUL” that

21

included tag lines like “indulge in dessert without the spoon” and “have a sweet tooth, try brulee”

22

(referencing the crème brûlée flavor).

23
24
25
26
27
28

An “influencer” on social media is a person who has garnered hundreds of thousands to millions of followers to
whom they can market and promote products often in partnership with companies like JUUL.
29

31

Gardiner Harris, Flavors Banned From Cigarettes to Deter Youth, THE NEW YORK TIMES (Sept. 22, 2009)
https://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/23/health/policy/23fda.html
32
See Duell et al., Free-Base Nicotine Determination in Electronic Cigarette Liquids by tH NMR Spectroscopy (Jun
18, 2018) 31 Chern. Res. Toxicol. 431-434, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmclarticles/PMC6008736/ (as of August 19,
2019).

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 13

75.

1
2

In 2017, Defendant advertised their “cool mint” by encouraging consumers to

“start your week with cool mint juul pods,” and to “beat the august heat with cool mint.”
76.

3

In 2018, Defendant announced it had stopped accepting retail orders for many

4

flavored JUULpods. However, the flavored pods are still available on Defendant’s website. Also,

5

the “cool mint” flavor is still available in stores.33

6

C.

The Effects of Nicotine on Adolescents
77.

7

Leading health authorities support two major conclusions from a 1998 report issued

8

by the Surgeon General of the United States regarding nicotine and tobacco: (i) Nicotine is the

9

drug in tobacco that causes addiction, and (2) the physiological and behavioral processes that

10

determine tobacco addiction are similar to those that determine heroin and cocaine addiction.
78.

11

The human brain is not fully developed until age 25. Nicotine from e-cigarettes,

12

like JUUL, can lead to addiction, harm to brain development, and change the way brain functions

13

in users under the age of 26 as supported by the Surgeon General’s opinion.34
79.

14

Nicotine fosters addiction through the brain’s “reward” pathway. Nicotine, both a

15

stimulant and a relaxant, affects the central nervous system; increases blood pressure, pulse, and

16

metabolic rate; constricts blood vessels of the hair and skin; and causes muscle relaxation.
80.

17

When nicotine is inhaled, it enters the bloodstream through membranes in the

18

mouth and upper respiratory tract through the lungs. Once in the bloodstream, nicotine reaches

19

the brain, binds to receptors, and triggers a series of physiologic effects in the user that are

20

perceived as a “buzz” or “high” that can induce happiness, arousal, and reduction of stress and

21

anxiety.

22

norepinephrine, vasopressin, serotonin, and beta endorphin. With regular nicotine use, these

23

feelings diminish over time and the user must consume increasingly larger amounts of nicotine to

24

achieve the same pleasurable effect.

These effects are caused by the release of dopamine, acetylcholine, epinephrine,

25
26
27

33

Kaplan, supra note 24.
Neal L. Benowitz, Pharmacology of Nicotine: Addiction, Smoking-Induced Disease, and Therapeutics, 49
ANNUAL REVIEW OF PHARMACOLOGY AND TOXICOLOGY 57 (2009).
34

28

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 14

81.

1

The neurological changes caused by nicotine lead to addiction. Repeat exposure to

2

nicotine causes neurons in the brain to adapt to the action of the drug and return brain function

3

back to normal. This process, called neuroadaptation, leads to increasing tolerance of nicotine,

4

whereby a given level of nicotine begins to have less of an effect on the user.
82.

5

Once the brain is addicted to nicotine, the absence of it causes compulsive, drug-

6

seeking behavior. It also causes withdrawal symptoms, which include but are not limited to

7

suicidal ideation, anxiety, depression, irritability, mood swings, stress, difficulty concentrating,

8

restlessness, headaches, insomnia, heart palpitations, and tremors.
83.

9
10

adolescents, whose brains are still developing.35
84.

11
12

The aforementioned effects of nicotine are particularly pronounced amongst

Nicotine affects neurological development in adolescents, and exposure to nicotine

during adolescence produces an increased vulnerability to nicotine addiction.36
85.

13

Adolescent nicotine addiction causes “substantial neural remodeling,” including

14

those parts of the brain governed by dopamine or acetylcholine, which play central roles in reward

15

functioning and cognitive function. Adolescent smokers are found to have weakened neural

16

responses including “diminished sensitivity to non-drug rewards.”37 This effect becomes even

17

more severe in adolescents who smoke more than 5 cigarettes, or a quarter of a JUUL pod, per day.
86.

18

Other brain changes from nicotine include increased sensitivity to other drugs and

19

heightened impulsivity. “Brain imaging on adolescents suggest that those who begin smoking

20

regularly at a young age have markedly reduced activity in the prefrontal cortex and perform less

21

well on tasks related to memory and attention compared to people who don’t smoke.”38
87.

22

One JUUL pod contains approximately 200 puffs, which delivers nearly as much

23
24
25
26
27
28

35

Mariam Arain et al., Maturation of The Adolescent Brain, 9 NEUROPSYCHIATRIC DISEASE AND TREATMENT
449 (2013).
36
Id.
37
Id.
38
Erin Brodwin, An E-Cigarette with Twice the Nicotine of Comparable Devices is Taking Over High Schools and Scientists are Sounding the Alarm, Business Insider (April 30, 2018), https://www.businessinsider.com/juule-cig-vaping-health-effects-2018-3

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 15

1

nicotine as a pack of cigarettes, according to the product website. Thus, if a teen consumes one

2

pod a week, in five weeks, it is equivalent to about 100 cigarettes (5 packs of cigarettes). This

3

makes the teen equivalent to an established smoker.39
88.

4

Because adolescent brains are still developing, youth and young adults are uniquely

5

at risk for long-term, long-lasting effects of nicotine exposure, including addiction, mood disorders,

6

permanent lowering of impulse control, and changes in brain synapses which harm the parts of the

7

brain that control attention and learning.40
89.

8
9

Adolescents develop nicotine dependence and addiction at a faster rate than adults,

find nicotine more rewarding, underestimate the risks of smoking, and are more influenced by

10

social smoking behaviors of persons in their age group.41

11

D.

JUUL’s Nicotine Warning Fails to Disclose Its Highly Addictive Nature
90.

12

According to the National Institutes of Health, the “amount and speed of nicotine

13

delivery plays a critical role in the potential for abuse of tobacco products.” 42 The cigarette

14

industry has long known that “nicotine is the addicting agent in cigarettes”43 and that “nicotine

15

satisfaction is the dominant desire” of nicotine addicts.44
91.

16
17

In U.S. patent No. 9,215,895 ("the '895 patent"), JUUL describes a process for

combining benzoic acids with nicotine to produce nicotine salts, a formulation that mimics the

18
19
20
Ana B. Ibarra et al., The Juul’s So Cool, Kids Smoke It In School, WASH. POST (Mar. 26, 2018), available at
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/the-juuls-so-cool-kids-smoke-it-inschool/2018/03/26/32bb7d80-30d6-11e8-b6bd-0084a1666987_story.html?utm_term=.d664213cde10.
40
Know the Risks; E-Cigarettes and Brain Development, https://e-cigarettes.surgeongeneral.gov/knowtherisks.html.
41
Goriounova NA, Mansvelder HD. Short- and long-term consequences of nicotine exposure during adolescence for
prefrontal cortex neuronal network function. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med. (Dec. 2012).
42
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, HOW TOBACCO SMOKE CAUSES DISEASE: THE BIOLOGY AND
BEHAVIORAL
BASIS
FOR
SMOKING
ATTRIBUTABLE
TO
DISEASE
(2010)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK53018/
39

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

43

Tobacco
Industry
Quotes
on
Nicotine
Addiction,
OK.GOV,
https://www.ok.gov/okswat/documents/Tobacco%20Industry%20Quotes%20on%20Nicotine%20Addiction.pdf (last
visited August 5, 2019).
44
Id.; John Schwartz, 1973 Cigarette Company Memo Proposed New Brands For Teens,
WASHINGTONPOST.COM (October 4, 1995) https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1995/10/04/1973cigarette-company-memo-proposed-new-brands-for-teens/eaf66416-3939-4c5f-9fbf1db1897673ab/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.d4d274af09a2.

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 16

1

nicotine salt additive developed by RJ Reynolds decades earlier.
92.

2

The JUUL patent included a blood plasma study comparing the pharmacokinetic

3

effects of nicotine benzoate though an e-cigarette as compared to nicotine through a Pall Mall

4

traditional cigarette.
93.

5

The study revealed that ingesting nicotine benzoate though an e-cigarette

6

substantially increases nicotine delivery as compared to a traditional cigarette, i.e. that the e-

7

cigarette delivered higher amounts of nicotine than a traditional combustible cigarette.
94.

8

JUUL is delivering doses of nicotine that are several times higher than those

9

allowed in normal cigarettes. Blood test results in JUUL’s 2014 patent application show that

10

JUUL’s nicotine solution delivers more nicotine to the bloodstream than a Pall Mall cigarette,

11

creates a peak nicotine blood concentration that is 36% higher than a Pall Mall cigarette, and

12

increases the heart rate faster than a Pall Mall cigarette. Yet JUUL has failed to disclose to

13

consumers that its pods nicotine salt formulation delivers an exceptionally potent dose of nicotine.
95.

14

In a 2015 interview, Ari Atkins, JUUL’s research & development engineer and one

15

of the inventors of the JUUL device, said this about the role of acids: “In the tobacco plant, there

16

are these organic acids that naturally occur. And they help stabilize the nicotine in such a way that

17

makes it, I've got to choose the words carefully here: Appropriate for inhalation.”
96.

18

JUUL' s manipulation of nicotine pH directly affects the palatability of nicotine

19

inhalation by reducing the "throat hit" users experience when vaping. Benzoic acid reduces the pH

20

of solutions of nicotine, an alkali with a pH of8.0 in its unadulterated, freebase form. This reduction

21

in pH converts naturally occurring unprotonated nicotine, which causes irritation in the throat and

22

respiratory tract, to protonated nicotine, which is not be absorbed in the throat or upper respiratory

23

tract and, therefore, does not irritate the throat. A recent study found that JUUL' s e-liquid had a

24

pH of under 6.0, suggesting that the JUUL contains almost no freebase (i.e., non-salt form)

25

nicotine.45

26
27
45

28

Lauterbach, One More Time Unprotonated Nicotine in £-Cigarette Aerosols: Is It Really There? (20 18) www.
coresta.org/sites/default(files/abstracts/20 18 _ TSRC83 _Lauterbach.pdf (as of July 5, 2019); Other studies have

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 17

1

97.

JUUL lowers the pH of nicotine, which prevents the harsh throat irritation usually

2

associated with cigarettes. This reduction in pH converts naturally occurring nicotine, which

3

causes irritation in the throat and respiratory tract, into salt nicotine.46

4
5
6

98.

A recent study found JUUL’s e-liquid had a pH of under 6.0, suggesting JUUL

contains almost no freebase (non-salt) nicotine.47
99.

High overall nicotine levels and low freebase nicotine levels allow JUUL users to

7

vape aerosols with minimal harshness when they inhale.48 The study concluded “[t]his may well

8

contribute to the current prevalence of JUUL products among youth.”49

9

100.

Similarly, a recent study of JUUL pods found “[t]he nicotine levels delivered by

10

the JUUL are similar to or even higher than those delivered by cigarettes.”50 JUUL delivers up to

11

36% more nicotine per puff than a Marlboro.51

12

101.

Because “nicotine yield is strongly correlated with tobacco consumption,” a JUUL

13

pod with its greater absorbable nicotine will strongly correlate with higher rates of consumption

14

of JUULpods, generating more revenue for JUUL.

15
16
17
18

102.

The high nicotine levels found in JUUL create a greater addiction potential than

traditional cigarettes.
103.

JUUL PRODUCTS amplify the health risks associated with nicotine consumption

because their users receive a far more potent dose than if they smoked a traditional cigarette.

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

confirmed the low ratio of freebase nicotine in JUUL products. See Duell eta/., Free-Base Nicotine Determination in
Electronic Cigarette Liquids by tH NMR Spectroscopy (Jun 18, 2018) 31 Chern. Res. Toxicol. 431-434,
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmclarticles/PMC6008736/ (as of July 5th, 2019).
46
Anna K. Duell, et al., Free Base Nicotine Determinations in Electronic Cigarette Liquids by H NMR Spectroscopy,
31(6) CHEM. RES. TOXICAL 431 (2018)
47
Id.
48
Id.
49
Id.
50
Samantha M. Reilly et al., Free Radical, Carbonyl, and Nicotine Levels Produced by JUUL Electronic
Cigarettes,
NICOTINE
AND
TOBACCO
RESEARCH,
(October
20,
2018),
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30346584
51
E-Cigarettes, EC.EUROPA.EDU, https://ec.europa.eu/health/sites/health/files/tobacco/docs/fs_ecigarettes_en.pdf
(last visited August 5, 2019); Ronny Linder, JUUL Warns it Will Fight Israel Over Potential Ban on Its Ecigarettes, HAARETZ.COM (June 3, 2018 9:52 p.m.), https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/business/juul-warnsit-will-fight-israel-over-potential-ban-on-its-e-cigarettes-1.6140058

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 18

1
2
3
4
5

104.

JUUL’s design allows them to be consumed anywhere, including indoors.

Therefore, the traditional “smoke breaks” do not apply.
105.

Since a JUUL pod contains approximately 20 cigarettes and has no automatic off

switch, JUUL users can inhale JUUL regularly without having to relight or grab another cigarette.
106.

Unlike combustible cigarettes that have a definite and natural stopping point, JUUL

6

only stops when the device runs out of battery or the pod runs out of liquid. This leads JUUL users

7

to have less awareness of their total nicotine consumption and a greater amount of nicotine

8

consumed.

9

107.

The amount of 12th grade students who reported vaping nicotine nearly doubled

10

from 11 to 21 percent in 2018.

11

always contain nicotine.

12

108.

Sixty-three percent of JUUL users did not know JUUL pods

Despite making numerous revisions to its packaging since 2015, JUUL did not add

13

nicotine warnings to the JUUL device, JUUL pods, or their product labels until very recently when

14

the exterior packaging was changed to add the following language: “Warning: This product

15

contains nicotine. Nicotine is an addictive chemical.”
The exterior packaging also contains, in small print, the phrase “The Alternative

16

109.

17

for Adult Smokers.”

18

110.

The recently added warning fails to disclose the highly addictive nature of the

19

product itself, including, inter alia, that the JUUL pods’ nicotine salt formulation delivers an

20

exceptionally potent dose of nicotine, that JUUL is delivering doses of nicotine that are several

21

times higher than those allowed in normal cigarettes, that the efficiency with which the product

22

delivers nicotine into the bloodstream increases its addictiveness, that it can be more addictive

23

than traditional cigarettes and that it poses serious health risks.

24
25
26
27

111.

JUUL never disclosed to consumers that its e-cigarettes and pods are at least as

addictive as, if not more addictive than, traditional cigarettes and pose serious health risks.
112.

Instead, JUUL marketed its products as an “alternative to cigarettes,” thereby

giving the false impression that they are a healthy alternative to cigarette use.

28

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 19

113.

1
2

JUUL’s deceitful advertising campaign has proven successful, as use of JUUL

products is widespread, particularly among vulnerable youth.
114.

3

JUUL actively concealed the nicotine content and nicotine potency of JUUL e-

4

cigarettes from Wakefield, Plaintiff, and the public while simultaneously disclosing false or

5

misleading evidence concerning nicotine content.
115.

6

JUUL concealed material information regarding the effect of JUUL e-cigarettes

7

and made misrepresentations from the time the JUUL e-cigarette was announced to this day.

8

Defendant still has not disclosed the truth about JUUL e-cigarettes.
116.

9

JUUL operates an “auto ship” subscription service through its website that allows

10

for the routine shipment of its pods. Every time a subscriber purchases five, four-packs of JUUL

11

pods, the next four-pack is shipped free of charge. This business model plays into the hands of

12

adolescents who often hide their JUUL use from parents and allows for a continuous stream of

13

pods without the need for adult intervention so long as an adolescent has access to a credit card

14

for the initial purchase.

15

E.

Defendant’s Conduct Caused Wakefield’s Death

16

117.

Daniel David Wakefield was an 18-year-old resident of Pasco County, Florida.

17

118.

Around age 15, Wakefield was exposed to Defendant’s advertising and

18

promotional efforts via many sources, including social media, peer pressure, online sources, and

19

direct emails.

20

119.

Wakefield, a child of parents who smoked combustible cigarettes, was attracted

21

to Defendant’s candy-like flavors, sleek and discreet design, and its representations that it was a

22

healthier alternative to combustible cigarettes. Wakefield did not smoke traditional cigarettes.

23
24
25

120.

Wakefield tried numerous JUUL flavors and purchased JUULpods from various

sources, including convenience stores and online.
121.

In response to Plaintiff’s concerns regarding the safety of JUUL products,

26

Wakefield informed his mother that he read materials indicating JUUL was safe and did not pose

27

the health risks that accompany combustible cigarettes.

28

properties and that it was unsafe for anyone under the age of 26.

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 20

He was unaware of its addictive

1
2
3

122.

Wakefield was an active, healthy teenager who excelled in school before he began

using JUUL. He was in the gifted, advanced program from elementary school and into high school.
123.

Once Wakefield began using JUUL, his interest and performance in school

4

significantly declined and his emotional well-being was substantially altered. Within a few weeks

5

of use, Wakefield became intensely addicted to JUUL. He was no longer interested in academics

6

and decided to abandon school for virtual teaching - and ultimately took his GED - rather than

7

graduating. In addition, he suffered severe mood swings if he did not have access to JUUL.

8

Plaintiff recalled an instance where Wakefield became enraged and threw a mini refrigerator from

9

the top floor of his home because he was angry about not being able to vape.

10

124.

Less than a year after he began using JUUL, Wakefield was hospitalized for three

11

days due to breathing and lung complications at Saint Joseph’s North Children’s Hospital. He

12

was so addicted to JUUL that hospital staff affixed nicotine patches to Wakefield’s skin

13

throughout his hospitalization.

14

125.

Wakefield continued using JUUL after his release from the hospital. He was

15

regularly inundated with JUUL advertisements and marketing materials via his Gmail account.

16

He was adamant that JUUL was safe and did not pose any health risks.

17

126.

On the night of August 30, 2018, Wakefield slept at his father’s house. He had

18

spent the day helping his mother move boxes in their home, getting an oil change, and spending

19

time with friends. Plaintiff spoke to Wakefield at approximately 7:00 p.m., at which time

20

Wakefield told his mother he was going to watch television with his friend and dad at his father’s

21

house. Plaintiff did not detect any signs of labored breathing or wheezing during their call. At

22

approximately 10:00 p.m., Wakefield texted his mother to let her know he would be spending the

23

night as his father’s house.

24

127.

At approximately 4:00 a.m., Wakefield’s dad went into the kitchen to get a drink

25

of water. He noticed Wakefield looked funny; he touched his son and found him stiff and

26

unresponsive. Wakefield was declared deceased the morning of August 31, 2018. He was 18

27

years old. His death was attributed to breathing complications.

28

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 21

1

128.

Wakefield’s death had a devastating impact on Plaintiff. She does not know how

2

to continue on without her son. She has not been able to sleep, has not been able to work, and

3

cries every single day. She is, in her words, “sentenced to a life of sadness.”

4
5

129.

Defendant’s conduct and the defects in JUUL PRODUCTS were a substantial

factor in causing Wakefield’s death.
V.

6

CAUSES OF ACTION

7

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

8

Strict Products Liability – Design Defect – Consumer Expectations Test

9

(Against Defendants JUUL and DOES 1 through 30)

10

130.

Plaintiff incorporates the above and below allegations by reference.

11

131.

At all relevant times, Defendant JUUL Labs, Inc., aided by DOES 1-30, inclusive,

12

designed, manufactured, marketed, distributed, and/or sold the JUUL PRODUCTS that

13

Wakefield consumed.

14
15
16

132.

JUUL PRODUCTS were defective in design. They were not as safe for their

intended or reasonably foreseeable use as ordinary consumers were led to believe.
133.

Defendant JUUL Labs, Inc., and DOES 1 through 30, inclusive, had constructive

17

notice of knowledge and knew, or with reasonable care should have known, that JUUL

18

PRODUCTS were dangerous and defective in design due to the high risk of addiction to nicotine.

19

134.

Defendant JUUL Labs, Inc., and DOES 1 through 30, inclusive, had constructive

20

notice or knowledge, knew, or with reasonable care should have known, that JUUL PRODUCTS

21

were dangerous and defective in design because delivering potent high doses of nicotine and other

22

toxic chemicals to adolescents could cause addiction, thereby permanently altering the structure

23

of the user’s developing brain, as well as cause harm to the airways, throat, and lungs. Each of

24

these risks can result in catastrophic, life-altering injuries.

25
26
27
28

135.

As a result of Defendant JUUL Labs, Inc., and DOES 1 through 30’s conduct,

Wakefield suffered death and Plaintiff was severely harmed as described herein.
136.

The defects in JUUL PRODUCTS were a substantial factor in causing Wakefield’s

death and Plaintiff’s harm.

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 22

1

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

2

Strict Products Liability – Design Defect – Risk Utility Test

3

(Against Defendants JUUL and DOES 1 through 30)

4

137.

Plaintiff incorporates the above and below allegations by reference.

5

138.

At all relevant times, Defendant JUUL Labs, Inc., aided by DOES 1 through 30,

6

inclusive, designed, manufactured, marketed, distributed, and/or sold the JUUL PRODUCTS that

7

Wakefield consumed.
139.

8

JUUL PRODUCTS’ defective design poses a great risk of harm that outweighs

9

any purported benefits. Defendants JUUL Labs, Inc., and DOES 1 through 30, designed JUUL

10

PRODUCTS to be attractive and palatable to teens and nonsmokers by making JUUL

11

PRODUCTS in youth-friendly colors and pod flavors that minimize the harsh taste and

12

discomfort of traditional smoking. Defendants could have designed the product to appeal to adult

13

smokers over the age of 26 who smoked conventional cigarettes without teen-friendly flavors and

14

colors. Defendants could have designed JUUL PRODUCTS with a significantly lower nicotine

15

concentration that would deliver enough nicotine to satisfy adult consumers, in order to reduce

16

the risks from high exposure to nicotine and repeated exposures to the toxic chemicals in JUUL

17

PRODUCTS.
140.

18

Defendants, and each of them, had constructive notice or knowledge, knew, or

19

should by reasonable case should have known that JUUL PRODUCTS were dangerous and

20

defective in design. Delivering potent high doses of nicotine and other toxic chemicals to

21

adolescents could cause addiction, thereby permanently altering the structure of their developing

22

brains, and causing risk of bodily injury including but not limited to injury to the airway, throat

23

and lungs. Each of these risks can result in catastrophic, life-altering injuries.
141.

24
25

As a result of the defect in JUUL PRODUCTS, Wakefield suffered death and

Plaintiff was harmed as described herein.
142.

26

The defects in JUUL PRODUCTS were a substantial factor in causing Wakefield’s

27

death and Plaintiff’s harm.

28

///

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 23

1

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

2

Strict Products Liability – Failure to Warn

3

(Against Defendants JUUL and DOES 1 through 30)

4

143.

Plaintiff incorporates the above and below allegations by reference.

5

144.

At all relevant times, Defendant JUUL Labs, Inc., aided by DOES 1 through 30,

6

inclusive, designed, manufactured, marketed, distributed, and/or sold the JUUL PRODUCTS that

7

Wakefield consumed.

8

145.

The JUUL PRODUCTS that Wakefield consumed had potential risks that were

9

known, or knowable, considering the scientific and medical knowledge regarding nicotine

10

addiction and its consequences that were generally accepted in the scientific community at the

11

time of manufacture, distribution, or sale.

12
13
14
15
16

146.

The potential risks presented a substantial danger when the JUUL PRODUCTS

were both used and misused in an intended or reasonably foreseeable way.
147.

The ordinary consumer of JUUL PRODUCTS would not have recognized the

potential risks without any warning from Defendants.
148.

JUUL PRODUCTS were defective and unreasonably dangerous when they left

17

Defendants’ possession.

18

PRODUCTS are powerfully addictive and unsafe for anyone under 26, that JUUL PRODUCTS

19

may impair learning and cognition, and that JUUL PRODUCTS may cause injury including but

20

not limited to injury to the airway, throat, and lungs, as well as permanent brain changes and

21

mood disorders. Instead, as described herein, Defendants, and each of them, made their products

22

available in youth-friendly colors and flavors. Defendants also designed their products to be more

23

palatable to youth and nonsmokers by minimizing the traditional discomfort associated with

24

smoking and maximizing the level of nicotine that is absorbed by users, making them even more

25

addictive and dangerous.

26

149.

They failed to contain adequate warnings, including that JUUL

JUUL PRODUCTS were defective and unreasonably dangerous when they left

27

Defendants’ possession because they lacked sufficient instructions regarding product usage.

28

JUUL PRODUCTS did not include instructions that they should not be used by anyone under age

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 24

1

26 and should not be used concurrently with cigarettes. JUUL PRODUCTS failed to provide

2

instructions regarding how many pods are safe to consume in one day.

3

150.

Defendants, and each of them, had constructive notice or knowledge, knew, or

4

with reasonable care should have known that JUUL PRODUCTS were dangerous and defective

5

without adequate warnings or instructions because delivering potent high doses of nicotine and

6

other toxic chemicals to adolescents could lead cause addiction, thereby permanently altering the

7

structure of their developing brain, and that they could cause other physical injury including but

8

not limited to injury to the airway, throat, and lungs. Each of these risks can result in catastrophic,

9

life-altering injuries.

10

151.

11
12
13
14
15

Defendants, and each of them, failed to adequately warn or instruct concerning the

potential risks of the JUUL PRODUCTS.
152.

As a result of Defendants’ conduct, Wakefield suffered death and Plaintiff was

severely harmed.
153.

The lack of sufficient instructions and warnings was a substantial factor in causing

Wakefield’s death and Plaintiff’s harm.

16

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

17

Negligence and/or Gross Negligence

18

(Against Defendants JUUL and DOES 1-30)

19

154.

Plaintiff incorporates the above and below allegations by reference.

20

155.

Defendants, and each of them, designed, produced, manufactured, assembled,

21

packaged, labeled, advertised, promoted, marketed, sold, supplied and/or otherwise placed JUUL

22

PRODUCTS into the stream of commerce, and therefore owed a duty of reasonable care to avoid

23

causing harm to those who consumed it, such as Wakefield.

24

156.

Defendants’ products could endanger others if negligently made or promoted.

25

Defendants knew the risks that young people would be attracted to JUUL PRODUCTS given the

26

teen-friendly colors and flavors. Defendants knew or should have known the importance of

27

ensuring that the products were not sold and/or distributed to anyone under age 26.

28

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 25

157.

1

Defendants were negligent in designing, manufacturing, supplying, inspecting,

2

testing (or not testing), marketing, promoting, advertising, packaging, and/or labeling JUUL

3

PRODUCTS.
158.

4

Defendants knew or should have known that JUUL PRODUCTS, as a powerfully

5

addictive and dangerous nicotine-delivery device, needed to be researched, tested, designed,

6

advertised, marketed, promoted, produced, packaged, labeled, manufactured, inspected, sold, and

7

supplied without defects and with due care to avoid needlessly causing harm. Defendants knew

8

or should have known that JUUL PRODUCTS could cause serious risk of harm, particularly to

9

young persons like Wakefield.
159.

10

Defendant JUUL Labs, Inc., and/or its predecessor(s)-in-interest, along with

11

Defendants DOES 1 through 30, were negligent, reckless and careless and failed to take the care

12

and duty owed to Wakefield, thereby causing Wakefield to suffer death and Plaintiff to suffer

13

harm.

14
15

160.

The negligence and extreme carelessness of Defendants and/or their

predecessor(s)-in-interest includes, but is not limited to, the following:

16

a.

Failure to take reasonable care in the design of JUUL PRODUCTS;

17

b.

Failure to use reasonable care in the production of JUUL PRODUCTS;

18

c.

Failure to use reasonable care in the manufacture of JUUL PRODUCTS;

19

d.

Failure to use reasonable care in the assembly of JUUL PRODUCTS;

20

e.

Failure to perform adequate testing of JUUL PRODUCTS prior to

21

marketing to ensure safety, including long-term testing of the products,

22

testing for injury to the brain, respiratory, and cardiovascular systems, and

23

testing for other related medical conditions;

24

f.

Failure to use reasonable care in supplying JUUL PRODUCTS;

25

g.

Failure to use reasonable care in advertising, promoting, and marketing
JUUL PRODUCTS;

26
27

h.

Promotion of JUUL PRODUCTS to young people under age 26;

28

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 26

1

i.

Use of flavors and design to appeal to young people under age 26, in that

2

JUUL PRODUCTS smell good, look cool and are easy to conceal from

3

parents and teachers;

4

j.

“harshness,” thereby easily creating and sustaining addiction;

5
6

k.

l.

m.

n.

o.

Failure to reasonably and properly test and properly analyze the testing of
JUUL PRODUCTS under reasonably foreseeable circumstances;

15
16

Failure to develop tools or support to help people addicted to JUUL
PRODUCTS quit using the products;

13
14

Failure to curb use of JUUL PRODUCTS among young people under age
26;

11
12

Failure to prevent use of JUUL PRODUCTS among young people under
age 26;

9
10

Failure to prevent JUUL PRODUCTS from being sold to young people
under age 26;

7
8

Use of design that maximizes nicotine delivery while minimizing

p.

Failure to warn customers about the dangers associated with use of JUUL

17

PRODUCTS, in that they are powerfully addictive and unsafe for anyone

18

under age 26; significantly increase risk of injury, including but not limited

19

to injury to the airway, throat, and lungs; and can cause permanent brain

20

changes, mood disorders, and impairment of thinking and cognition;

21

q.

under age 26;

22
23

r.

Failure to provide any instructions regarding a safe amount of JUULpods
to consume in a day;

24
25

Failure to instruct customers not to use JUUL PRODUCTS if they are

s.

Failure to warn customers that Defendants had not adequately tested or

26

researched JUUL PRODUCTS to ensure safety, including long-term

27

testing of the products for potential injury to the brain, respiratory, and

28

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 27

1

cardiovascular systems, and other related medical conditions prior to

2

marketing;
t.

3

Failure to utilize proper materials and components in the design of JUUL
PRODUCTS to ensure they would not deliver unsafe doses of nicotine;

4
5

u.

Failure to use due care under the circumstances;

6

v.

Failure to take necessary steps to modify JUUL PRODUCTS to avoid

7

delivering high doses of nicotine to young people and repeatedly exposing

8

them to toxic chemicals;

9

w.

Failure to recall JUUL PRODUCTS; and

10

x.

Failure to inspect JUUL PRODUCTS for them to operate properly and
avoid delivering unsafe levels of nicotine to young persons.

11
12

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

13

Negligent Failure to Recall

14

(Against Defendant JUUL)

15

161.

Plaintiff incorporates the above and below allegations by reference.

16

162.

Defendants acted negligently by failing to recall JUUL PRODUCTS prior to

17
18
19
20

Wakefield’s death in 2018.
163.

Defendants, and each of them, designed, manufacturer assembled, produced,

marketed, distributed, maintained, and/or sold JUUL PRODUCTS.
164.

Defendants knew, or reasonably should have known that, when used as intended,

21

JUUL PRODUCTS presented or were likely to present dangers to users, especially adolescents

22

like Wakefield. Defendants knew or reasonably should have known that JUUL PRODUCTS

23

delivered highly concentrated doses of nicotine which cause addiction, that JUUL PRODUCTS

24

were unsafe for anyone under the age of 26, and that JUUL PRODUCTS cause physical injury to

25

the respiratory system, permanent brain changes, mood disorders, strokes, heart attacks, and other

26

cardiovascular injuries.

27
28

165.

After JUUL PRODUCTS were placed on the market in 2015 and before 2018,

Defendants knew, or reasonably should have known JUUL PRODUCTS were being consumed

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 28

1

by people under age 26.

2

concentrated does of nicotine JUUL PRODUCTS delivered were unsafe for consumers under the

3

age of 26 and could cause addiction, respiratory system damage, permanent brain damage, mood

4

disorders, stroke, heart attack, and other cardiovascular injuries. Despite this, Defendants failed

5

to recall, repair, or warn of the dangers JUUL PRODUCTS posed to consumers.
166.

6

Defendants knew or reasonably should have known the highly

A reasonable designer, manufacturer, distributor, or seller facing the same or

7

similar circumstances as Defendants, in the exercise of reasonable care, would have recalled

8

JUUL PRODUCTS to ensure young consumers, like Wakefield, were not harmed.
167.

9

Defendants’ failure to timely recall JUUL PRODUCTS was a substantial factor in

10

causing Wakefield’s death. Had Defendants recalled JUUL PRODUCTS when they knew, or

11

should have known, the risks, Wakefield would not have used the products and would not have

12

suffered death.

13

SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION

14

Fraudulent Concealment

15

(Against Defendants JUUL and DOES 1 through 30)

16

168.

Plaintiff incorporates the above and below allegations by reference.

17

169.

Defendants had a duty to disclose material facts about JUUL PRODUCTS to

18

Wakefield and other consumers. Defendants intentionally failed to disclose facts to Wakefield

19

and other consumers regarding the nature and safety of JUUL PRODUCTS that were known only

20

to Defendants and could not have been reasonably discovered.
170.

21

At all times relevant, Defendants fraudulently and deceptively sold or partnered to

22

sell JUUL PRODUCTS to Wakefield as safe or not harmful, when Defendants knew it to be

23

untrue.

24

171.

Defendants fraudulently and deceptively downplayed or minimized any risk

25

associated with JUUL PRODUCTS especially for young persons under age 26. At all relevant

26

times, Defendant JUUL Labs, Inc., represented its products on its website as a “smarter” choice.

27

Defendant JUUL Labs, Inc., pitched investors by claiming that JUUL PRODUCTS were not

28

harmful, and therefore any concern about addiction was irrelevant. Defendants and/or others

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 29

1

worked together to pitch news stories or other media content designed to downplay the risks of

2

JUUL PRODUCTS suggesting that any concern was overblown, or a panic. These tactics mimic

3

those used by the tobacco industry to sow seeds of doubt and confusion among the public, to

4

initiate new users, to keep customers buying JUUL PRODUCTS, and to avoid regulation or

5

legislative efforts to control sales.

6
7
8
9
10
11

172.

Defendants failed to disclose to Wakefield that the JUUL PRODUCTS can cause

injury to the airway, throat, lungs, and other life-threatening illnesses.
173.

Defendants failed to disclose that they had not adequately researched or tested the

safety of JUUL PRODUCTS before placing them on the market and promoting them to young
people under age 26.
174.

At all times relevant to Plaintiff, Defendants failed to disclose that the nicotine

12

salts contained JUUL PRODUCTS were highly addictive in nature, and therefore that it would

13

be extremely difficult to stop using and/or purchasing JUULpods.

14

175.

Defendants failed disclose to Wakefield that JUUL PRODUCTS are designed to

15

create and sustain an addiction to nicotine, particularly in young consumers. Defendants also

16

manipulated the formulations of JUUL PRODUCTS in ways that could and would impact their

17

potency and addictiveness. Defendants did so without notifying Wakefield. Defendants actively

18

concealed the nicotine content and potency of JUUL PRODUCTS.

19

176.

Each of the misrepresentations and omissions concerned material facts that were

20

essential to the analysis undertaken by Wakefield as to whether to purchase or consume JUUL

21

PRODUCTS.

22

177.

Wakefield and Plaintiff did not know of the facts that Defendants concealed.

23

178.

Defendants intended to deceive Wakefield, Plaintiff, and the public by concealing

24
25
26
27
28

these facts in order to continue profiting.
179.

Defendants had a duty to accurately provide this information to Wakefield. In not

so informing Wakefield, Defendants breached their duty.
180.

Defendants had ample opportunities to disclose these facts to Wakefield, through

packaging, advertising, retail outlets, on their website, on social media, via e-mail distribution,

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 30

1

and even directly to the extent Wakefield purchased JUUL PRODUCTS directly through

2

Defendant JUUL Labs, Inc.’s online store. Defendants concealed material information at all

3

relevant times, through today. Defendants have yet to disclose the truth about JUUL PRODUCTS.

4

181.

Wakefield relied to his detriment on Defendants’ fraudulent omissions. Had

5

Wakefield been adequately informed of the material facts concealed from him regarding the

6

safety of JUUL PRODUCTS, and not intentionally deceived by Defendants, he would not have

7

purchased or used JUUL PRODUCTS and would not have suffered death.

8
9
10

182.

Defendants’ fraudulent concealment was a substantial factor in Wakefield’s death

and Plaintiff’s harm as described herein.
183.

Defendants’ acts and omissions as described herein were committed maliciously,

11

oppressively, deliberately, with intent to defraud, and in reckless disregard of Wakefield and

12

Plaintiff’s rights, interests, and well-being to enrich Defendants. Defendants’ conduct warrants

13

an assessment of punitive damages in an amount sufficient to deter such conduct in the future,

14

which amount is to be determined according to proof.

15

SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

16

Conspiracy to Commit Fraudulent Concealment

17

(Against Defendants JUUL and DOES 21 through 30)

18

184.

Plaintiff incorporates the above and below allegations by reference.

19

185.

During all relevant times, including before Wakefield consumed JUUL

20

PRODUCTS, Defendant JUUL Labs, Inc. was part of a conspiracy with tobacco and e-cigarette

21

industry players, DOES 1 through 30, to fraudulently conceal, misrepresent, and downplay the

22

risks of e-cigarettes to boost profits at the expense of public health. For research and development,

23

marketing, and distribution purposes, Defendant JUUL Labs, Inc., and DOES 1 through 30

24

engaged consultants, pundits, academics, lobbyists, media personalities, reporters, researchers,

25

and other influencers to tout the safety of e-cigarettes, and benefits of nicotine, while minimizing

26

or downplaying the dangers, particularly to those under age 26. These tactics mimic those used

27

by the tobacco industry to sow seeds of doubt and confusion among the public, to initiate new

28

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 31

1

users, to keep customers buying JUUL PRODUCTS, and to avoid regulation or legislative efforts

2

to control sales.

3

186.

Defendants JUUL Labs, Inc., and DOES 1 through 30 were aware that others in

4

the e-cigarette and tobacco industry planned to engage in a campaign of doubt to mislead,

5

downplay, deflect concerns about the risks of e-cigarettes and nicotine, and to fraudulently

6

conceal material information about the safety of these products and compounds.

7

187.

Defendants JUUL Labs, Inc., and DOES 1 through 30 agreed with others in the e-

8

cigarette and tobacco industry and intended that the conspiracy to commit fraudulent concealment

9

be committed.

10

188.

Defendant JUUL Labs, Inc. well-understood and continues to understand that by

11

working in concert with other e-cigarette manufacturers and the tobacco industry, it can more

12

effectively mislead and fraudulently conceal material facts from the public, including Wakefield

13

and Plaintiff, regarding risks of its products, as described herein.

14
15
16

189.

Defendants’ participation in this conspiracy was a substantial factor in causing

Wakefield’s death and Plaintiff's harm as alleged herein.
190.

Defendants’ acts and omissions as described herein were committed maliciously,

17

oppressively, deliberately, with intent to defraud, and in reckless disregard of Wakefield and

18

Plaintiff’s rights, interests, and well-being to enrich Defendants. Defendants’ conduct warrants

19

an assessment of punitive damages in an amount sufficient to deter such conduct in the future,

20

which amount is to be determined according to proof.

21

EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION

22

Intentional Misrepresentation

23

(Against Defendants JUUL and DOES 1 through 30)

24

191.

Plaintiff incorporates the above and below allegations by reference.

25

192.

At all times relevant, Defendants falsely represented through advertisements on

26

social media, traditional media outlets, and Defendant JUUL Labs, Inc.’s websites and packaging

27

that JUUL PRODUCTS were safe and not harmful.

28

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 32

1

193.

Defendants knew these representations were false or made them recklessly without

2

regard for their truth. For example, Defendant JUUL Labs, Inc., claims that it did not study the

3

safety of its products, acknowledging that it had a vested interest, and instead left it to others to

4

analyze their risks.

5

194.

Defendants intended for Wakefield to rely on these representations.

6

195.

Each of the misrepresentations concerned material facts that were essential to the

7
8

analysis undertaken by Wakefield as to whether to purchase or consume JUUL PRODUCTS.
196.

Wakefield reasonably relied on these representations and was harmed as described

9

herein. Wakefield’s reliance on Defendants’ representations was a substantial factor in causing

10

his severe injuries. Had Defendants told Wakefield the truth about the safety and composition of

11

JUUL PRODUCTS, he would not have purchased them.

12
13
14

197.

Defendants’ fraud was a substantial factor in Wakefield’s death and Plaintiff’s

harm as described herein.
198.

Defendants’ acts and omissions as described herein were committed maliciously,

15

oppressively, deliberately, with intent to defraud, and in reckless disregard of Wakefield and

16

Plaintiff s rights, interests, and well-being to enrich Defendants. Defendants’ conduct warrants

17

an assessment of punitive damages in an amount sufficient to deter such conduct in the future,

18

which amount is to be determined according to proof.

19

NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION

20

Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress

21

(Against Defendants JUUL and DOES 1 through 30)

22

199.

Plaintiff incorporates the above and below allegations by reference.

23

200.

Defendants' conduct herein, preying on youth and poisoning kids for profit, is so

24

outrageous in character and so extreme in degree as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency.

25

Defendants' conduct is atrocious and utterly intolerable. Defendants' outrageous conduct caused

26

and/or substantially contributed to Wakefield’s death and Plaintiff' injuries alleged herein.

27
28

201.

Defendants' egregious conduct toward Wakefield and Plaintiff was both intentional

and reckless. Defendants' conduct of intentionally addicting teenagers to nicotine to create lifelong

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 33

1

customers was directed primarily at young people like Wakefield, through their manipulation of

2

advertisements, social media, warnings, and even use of social media influencers indirectly to

3

target America's youth.
202.

4

Defendant also acted with reckless disregard when they knew that JUUL products

5

were powerfully addictive, contained more nicotine than necessary, and carried serious physical,

6

mental and emotional health risks, especially when used by young people, yet they marketed the

7

products to young people with reckless disregard of young consumers like Wakefield and with

8

reckless disregard of the probability that their conduct would cause severe emotional distress to

9

Wakefield and Plaintiff.
203.

10

Defendant's intentional and reckless conduct caused and continues to cause harm

11

and severe emotional distress to Plaintiff. Defendants interjected their product and themselves into

12

Wakefield and his family’s personal life, causing severe stress and dependence on their product,

13

and invading Wakefield and his parents’ mental and emotional tranquility.
204.

14

Defendant invaded Plaintiff’s peace of mind, without any right or privilege to do

15

so. The severe nicotine addiction caused by Defendant's product resulted in behavior and

16

symptoms so severe as to interfere with Wakefield’s everyday life and health. Defendant’s product

17

ultimately cost Wakefield his life.
205.

18

Further, as described herein, Wakefield’s addiction was a physical injury that

19

damaged and altered his developing brain. This addiction was no accident. It was the result of

20

Defendant's intentional, calculated behavior to addict young people like Wakefield to nicotine to

21

create a life-long customer. Wakefield’s life was cut short because of Defendants' outrageous

22

conduct.
206.

23

If it weren't for Defendant's intentional and reckless conduct, Wakefield would have

24

never tried JUUL, would not have been dependent on nicotine, and would still be alive today.

25

///

26

///

27

///

28

///

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 34

1

TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

2

Violations of the Unfair Competition Law ("UCL"), Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 et seq.

3

(Against Defendants JUUL and DOES 21 through 30)

4

207.

Plaintiff incorporates the above and below allegations by reference.

5

208.

The UCL prohibits acts of “unfair competition,” including any “unlawful, unfair

6

or fraudulent business act or practice.”
209.

7

Defendants have engaged in unlawful, unfair and fraudulent business acts and

8

practices in violation of the UCL. Defendants’ conduct violates the UCL in at least the following

9

ways:

10
11

a. By violating the California Consumer Legal Remedies Act, as described
below;

12

b. By concealing the health risks associated with JUUL PRODUCTS, including,

13

but not limited to, injury to the airway, throat, and lungs; addiction; permanent

14

brain changes, mood disorders and learning and cognitive impairments;

15

c. By concealing that JUUL PRODUCTS are unsafe for anyone under age 26;

16

d. By downplaying and minimizing the risks of JUUL PRODUCTS and

17

promoting them as safe and not harmful;

18

e. By conspiring with others in the tobacco industry to downplay and minimize

19

the risks of e-cigarette products, create confusion and doubt in the public

20

regarding the safety of e-cigarettes, overstate the benefits of nicotine and e-

21

cigarette products, and undermine the public health efforts to prevent and curb

22

use of e-cigarettes by those under age 26;

23

f. By misrepresenting the delivery of nicotine as “approximately equivalent to

24

one pack of cigarettes” when in fact, as consumed, JUUL PRODUCTS deliver

25

much higher quantities of nicotine;

26

g. By concealing that JUUL PRODUCTS are designed to create and sustain

27

addiction among young people rather to transition adult smokers from

28

conventional cigarettes;

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 35

h. By knowingly and intentionally designing JUUL PRODUCTS in a way that

1

deliberately appeals to young people, including but not limited to:

2
3

i. Making the pods available in flavors that Defendants knew that teens

4

would find irresistible and would not associate with tobacco or

5

smoking;

6

ii. Intentionally advertising and marketing JUUL PRODUCTS in ways

7

that make them appear deceptively harmless, including concealing that

8

they are highly addictive, pose long-term risks to developing brains

9

(mood disorders, permanent impairment of impulse control,

10

concentration and learning), cause repeated exposure to toxic

11

chemicals and can cause injury to the respiratory system;

12

iii. Designing JUUL PRODUCTS so that they maximize nicotine delivery,

13

while minimizing “harshness,” to recruit and retain young people as

14

the next generation of tobacco customers;
iv. Designing the JUUL device so that it is small and can easily be

15

concealed;

16
17

v. Designing the JUUL device so that it resembles a USB flash drive,

18

which can be charged in the USB port of laptop, so that parents and

19

teachers will have trouble identifying when a young person is

20

JUULing;

21

vi. Making the smell emitted when a young person exhales

22

indistinguishable from other common scents, so that parents and

23

teachers will not be any the wiser; and
vii. Promoting JUUL PRODUCTS on social media sites such as Twitter

24

and Instagram in order to appeal to the younger generation.

25
26
27

210.

Defendants’ unfair and fraudulent business acts and practices caused Wakefield to

purchase JUUL PRODUCTS.

28

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 36

1

211.

Defendants violated UCL by deceiving and misleading young consumers under

2

age 26 to purchase a product that is highly addictive and unsafe for them. JUUL PRODUCTS

3

have no benefit to its teen users. JUUL PRODUCTS deliver highly concentrated doses of nicotine

4

and other toxic chemicals that carry risks of respiratory and cardiovascular harm. Despite all

5

these risks, they are advertised as harmless. Defendants were and are aware that young persons

6

are unable to appreciate the risk of JUULing to their health and welfare, and that many young

7

people do not even know that JUUL PRODUCTS always contain nicotine, which is addictive or

8

unsafe for them in any amount. In this way, Defendants unfairly target young persons in order to

9

get customers for life.

10

212.

Defendants violated UCL by deceptively selling JUUL PRODUCTS to Wakefield

11

as harmless, and a “safer” alternative to cigarettes, while concealing that JUUL PRODUCTS are

12

unsafe for anyone under age 26, deliver a more potent dose of nicotine than conventional

13

cigarettes, are highly addictive, and can cause life-altering illnesses.

14

213.

Defendants’ misrepresentations and omissions as alleged herein were consistent

15

with and part of their scheme to lure young persons into becoming customers for life and to

16

maximize profits at the expense of public health.

17
18
19
20
21

214.

Accordingly, Plaintiff has suffered harm as a result of Defendants’ unlawful,

unfair and fraudulent business practices.
215.

Plaintiff seeks to enjoin further unlawful, unfair and fraudulent acts or practices

by Defendants under Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200.
216.

Plaintiff requests that this Court enter such orders or judgments as may be

22

necessary to enjoin Defendants from continuing their unfair and deceptive practices and to restore

23

to Plaintiff any money they acquired by unfair competition, including restitution and/or

24

disgorgement, as provided in Bus. & Prof. Code § 17203 and Bus. & Prof Code § 3345; and for

25

such other relief set forth below.

26

217.

Defendants’ conduct, as described herein, is unfair because it is immoral, unethical,

27

unscrupulous, oppressive, and substantially injurious. Under the guise of creating an alternative

28

for adult cigarette smokers, Defendants developed highly addictive and dangerous products and

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 37

1

marketed them to young people as cool, fun, and harmless. Their scheme successfully attracted

2

millions and millions of teens, including Wakefield, who have become addicted to their products

3

and have been exposed to high doses of nicotine and other toxic chemicals. As a result of

4

Defendants’ conduct, Wakefield and Plaintiff suffered harms as described herein, and others are

5

at risk of the same or similar injuries. Defendants created this epidemic and bear responsibility

6

for its consequences.
218.

7

The gravity of the harm resulting from Defendants’ conduct far outweighs any

8

conceivable utility of this conduct. There are reasonably available alternatives that would further

9

Defendants’ legitimate business interests in offering an alternative to adult cigarette smokers over

10

age 26, including, but not limited to, using only tobacco flavoring, designing the products to

11

deliver far less nicotine—only as much as would be sufficient to attract a nicotine-addicted

12

cigarette smoker—so as to reduce the nicotine-related harms and reduce the exposure to other

13

toxic chemicals, and offering the products “behind the counter” at pharmacies.

14

Defendants used kid-friendly flavors and design, promoted the products as harmless and cool,

15

conspired with others in the industry to downplay the risks and inflate the benefits, and have done

16

nothing to curb or prevent young people from starting and continuing to use JUUL PRODUCTS,

17

despite the known risks of harm.
219.

18

Instead,

Wakefield, and Plaintiff by extension, could not have reasonably avoided injury

19

from Defendants’ unfair conduct. Wakefield did not know, and had no reasonable means of

20

learning, that JUUL PRODUCTS could harm him as they did. Nor did Wakefield or Plaintiff

21

know that JUUL PRODUCTS had been designed to lure and trap Wakefield and other teens into

22

becoming a customer for life.
220.

23
24

Defendants’ misleading statements and omissions were a substantial factor in

causing Wakefield’s death and Plaintiff’s harm.
221.

25

The requested injunction under the UCL will primarily benefit the interests of the

26

general public. It will have the primary purpose and effect of prohibiting acts that threaten injury

27

to members of the public who have or will be exposed to Defendants’ conduct.

28

///

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 38

1

TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

2

Wrongful Death and Survival

3

(Against Defendants JUUL and DOES 1 through 30)

4

222.

5

223.

Plaintiff incorporates the above and below allegations by reference.
Wakefield’s death was the result of Defendants false representations through

6

advertisements on social media, traditional media outlets, and Defendant JUUL Labs, Inc.’s

7

websites and packaging that JUUL PRODUCTS were safe and not harmful.

8
9
10
11
12
13

224.

Defendants knew these representations were false or made them recklessly without

regard for their truth as well as the health and lives of its customers. Defendants intended for and Wakefield did - rely on Defendants’ representations.
225.

At all times and places mentioned herein, Defendants acted carelessly and

negligently and failed to protect Wakefield as a user of their product.
226.

During all times relevant to the allegations in this complaint, Defendants, and each

14

of them, their agents, employees, and representatives acted carelessly, negligently, and recklessly

15

with respect to Wakefield and Plaintiff, causing economic loss and death.

16
17
18
19
20

227.

Wakefield died as the direct and proximate result of the careless, negligent, and/or

reckless neglect and conduct of the Defendants.
228.

Accordingly, Plaintiff Lisa Marie Vail, individually and on behalf of the Estate of

Daniel David Wakefield, deceased, suffered the loss of love, comfort, care, and society of her son.
229.

As a further direct and proximate result of Defendants’ negligent acts, omissions

21

and conduct, and of the resulting injuries and death, Plaintiff has incurred expenses in an amount

22

not yet known.

23

230.

VI.

24
25
26

Plaintiff prays for judgment against the Defendants, as set forth below.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court:
1.

Award Plaintiff compensatory, restitutionary, rescissory, genera, consequential,

27

punitive and exemplary damages in an amount to be determined at trial, and also

28

but not limited to:

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 39

1

a.

General Damages;

2

b.

Special Damages, including all expenses, incidental past and future

3

expenses, medical expenses, and loss or earnings and earning

4

capacity;

5

2.

Award pre-judgement interest as permitted by law;

6

3.

Enter an appropriate injunction against Defendants and their officers, agents,
successors, employees, representatives, and assigns;

7
8

4.

Appoint a monitor and retain jurisdiction to ensure that Defendants comply with
the injunctive provisions of any decree of this Court;

9
10

5.

Enter other appropriate equitable relief;

11

6.

Award reasonable attorney’s fees and costs, as provided for by law; and

12

7.

Grant such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
VII.

13
14

JURY TRIAL DEMAND

Plaintiff demands a jury trial.

15
16
17
18

Dated: October 15, 2019

LEVIN SIMES ABRAMS LLP

19
20

Rachel Abrams
Mahzad K. Hite
Sara B. Craig
Angela J. Nehmens

21
22
23

Attorneys for Plaintiff

24
25
26
27
28

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL - 40