In re Juul Labs, Inc. Antitrust Litigation

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 Case No. 20-cv-02345-WHO 8 IN RE: JUUL Labs, Inc. Antitrust Litigation

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO

9 COMPEL AND DISMISS 10 Re: Dkt. No. 365 11 12 Currently before me is the motion of defendant JUUL Labs, Inc. (“JLI”) and two 13 individual defendants Nicholas Pritzker and Riaz Valani (“Directors”) to compel the claims of two 14 of the named Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs (DPPs) to arbitration.1 Consistent with my prior analyses 15 of JLI’s changing website and Ninth Circuit precedent, I GRANT the motion to compel. 16 Separately, JLI moves to dismiss the claim for injunctive relief stated in Count Three of the Third 17 Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint (TAC).2 In light of the unwinding of the 2018 18 agreement challenged in this lawsuit and Altria’s purchase of a competitor to JLI, the claim for 19 injunctive relief is implausible now. The motion to dismiss the request for injunctive relief is 20 GRANTED. 21 …