California Federal Judge Signals Likely Class Certification in Juul–Altria Antitrust Case

Key points

• A federal judge in California is set to approve class-action certification in the antitrust lawsuit between Juul and Altria. 
• Altria's attorneys have warned that differences in state laws could lead to "Frankenstein-like" damages. 
• The plaintiffs argue that California is at the center of the alleged conspiracy by Juul, so California law should apply. 
• The case involves consumers and distributors in 31 states and may proceed with compensation in phases. 
• The lawsuit stems from Altria's $12.8 billion investment in Juul in 2018. In the United States, class-action lawsuits must undergo court review and approval to proceed.

2Firsts, October 17, 2025 — U.S. District Judge William Orrick signaled that he is likely to certify classes of direct and indirect purchasers in an antitrust case accusing Juul Labs and Altria Group of colluding to restrict competition and reduce product variety.

During a Zoom hearing, Judge Orrick confirmed he had issued a tentative written ruling but would finalize his decision later in writing. Altria’s attorney James Rosenthal argued that conflicting state laws among 31 jurisdictions would make any damages framework unworkable and warned against creating a “Frankenstein’s monster” of multi-state damages calculations. He also opposed splitting the trial into separate liability and damages phases, noting it would require defense experts to testify twice.

Plaintiffs’ attorney Elana Katcher of Kaplan Fox Kilsheimer responded that minor state law variations should not block class certification, stressing California’s stake as Juul’s headquarters and a major market “during the conspiracy.” She argued that California’s Cartwright Act provides a coherent basis for liability and damages across the classes.

The suit was filed in 2020 after Altria’s $12.8 billion investment in Juul was challenged as anticompetitive. Although Altria fully divested its stake in 2023 and the FTC dropped its case, plaintiffs contend the companies could re-enter partnerships in the future.

The case is In re Juul Labs Inc. Antitrust Litigation, No. 3:20-cv-02345, before Judge William Orrick in the Northern District of California. A final written order on class certification is pending.

Image source: 2Firsts

We welcome news tips, article submissions, interview requests, or comments on this piece.

Please contact us at info@2firsts.com, or reach out to Alan Zhao, CEO of 2Firsts, on LinkedIn

Notice

1.  This article is intended solely for professional research purposes related to industry, technology, and policy. Any references to brands or products are made purely for objective description and do not constitute any form of endorsement, recommendation, or promotion by 2Firsts.

2.  The use of nicotine-containing products — including, but not limited to, cigarettes, e-cigarettes, nicotine pouchand heated tobacco products — carries significant health risks. Users are responsible for complying with all applicable laws and regulations in their respective jurisdictions.

3.  This article is not intended to serve as the basis for any investment decisions or financial advice. 2Firsts assumes no direct or indirect liability for any inaccuracies or errors in the content.

4.  Access to this article is strictly prohibited for individuals below the legal age in their jurisdiction.

Copyright

This article is either an original work created by 2Firsts or a reproduction from third-party sources with proper attribution. All copyrights and usage rights belong to 2Firsts or the original content provider. Unauthorized reproduction, distribution, or any other form of unauthorized use by any individual or organization is strictly prohibited. Violators will be held legally accountable.

For copyright-related inquiries, please contact: info@2firsts.com

AI Assistance Disclaimer

This article may have been enhanced using AI tools to improve translation and editorial efficiency. However, due to technical limitations, inaccuracies may occur. Readers are encouraged to refer to the cited sources for the most accurate information.

We welcome any corrections or feedback. Please contact us at: info@2firsts.com