New Lawsuit Accuses CCELL of Price-Fixing, Monopoly Tactics

A new class action lawsuit has been filed against Smoore, the parent company of cannabis vape brand CCELL, and its U.S.-based distributors, accusing them of illegally fixing prices and using patent litigation to maintain a monopoly over the cannabis vape hardware market. The lawsuit, filed by Arizona-based Earth’s Healing, Inc., alleges violations of the Sherman Act and claims that Smoore colluded with major distributors—including Jupiter Research LLC, Greenlane Holdings, and others—to suppress competition and artificially inflate prices.

According to the complaint, Smoore and its distributors agreed not to compete with each other, enforced minimum price agreements, and leveraged patent litigation to stifle rivals. The lawsuit follows years of legal battles, including a 2021 International Trade Commission (ITC) case in which Smoore accused multiple U.S. vape companies of patent infringement. Many smaller businesses were forced out of the market due to the high cost of litigation, but the ITC ultimately ruled against Smoore, finding that at least one of its key patents was invalid.

Despite that ruling, Smoore allegedly continued filing lawsuits against competitors, while maintaining restrictive pricing agreements with its distributors. The lawsuit claims these practices have led to higher costs for cannabis brands and consumers, limiting access to affordable vape technology.

Michael Brosgart, president of Next Level Ventures LLC (ACTIVE), which previously filed counterclaims against Smoore for its alleged monopoly tactics, said in a statement:

“The plaintiffs’ price-fixing allegations are no surprise. ACTIVE was the first party to hold Smoore legally accountable for its anti-competitive conduct, and preliminary expert damages analysis suggests that ACTIVE is entitled to nearly $200 million as the direct result of Smoore’s illegal conduct in the cannabis vape market. The class plaintiffs may be owed even more.”

The lawsuit marks a major escalation in ongoing antitrust disputes within the cannabis vape hardware sector. If successful, the case could reshape the competitive landscape and open the door for more alternatives in the market.