An issue our clients have encountered in a variety of transactions, including basic product purchase transactions and intellectual property licensing transactions, is that the California rules governing commercial cannabis licensees currently do not allow the exchange of free samples between licensees. We are unaware of an industry in which the wholesale purchaser of a large
California’s illicit market for cannabis is booming—not just out in remote grows deep in the wilderness, but also in delivery and even brick-and-mortal retail stores in big cities all over the state. Our California cannabis attorneys regularly receive questions from licensed cannabis companies about what they can do to stay competitive in the face of
California cannabis has a problem: roughly 80% of jurisdictions in the state prohibit cannabis stores of any kind, despite voters approving full legalization with Prop 64 (the Adult Use of Marijuana Act, now the Medicinal and Adult Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act, or MAUCRSA) in 2016 by nearly 60%. The result has been “cannabis
The prelude to Phase 3 licensing in the City of L.A. is finally upon us. Today, L.A. will begin accepting applications for Phase 3 social equity applicants for retail and delivery in the City. Specifically, Phase 3 social equity applicants will have from today through July 29th to prove up their Tier 1 or Tier
We have been closely following California’s commercial hemp cultivation licensing law since it was proposed last year as Senate Bill 1409 (see here, here, and here). In March, I wrote about some of the roadblocks to implementing SB-1409’s commercial hemp cultivation programs, and the lengthy review process of the California Department of Food and Agriculture (“CDFA”) regulation which
We’ve written time and again about the looming terror of Prop. 65 violations for cannabis businesses when it comes to packaging and labeling their products with the correct safe harbor language. The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (a/k/a Prop. 65), requires the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) to publish a
As expected (and as we’ve written about here), California cities have joined forces to fight the State’s regulation allowing delivery of cannabis in every jurisdiction. Here is a copy of the complaint. The lawsuit was filed in Fresno County Superior Court against the California Bureau of Cannabis Control and its chief, Lori Ajax. The local
For a few moments there, it seemed like the California cannabis delivery companies could deliver anywhere in the state—even to cities that said no. It now looks like that may not be allowed. In January 2019, the California Bureau of Cannabis Control (“BCC”)—which regulates cannabis delivery companies—issued Rule 5416(d), which says that “A delivery employee
I’ve written extensively about trademark litigation matters involving cannabis brands, but up until now, the trend in these lawsuits has been well-known non-cannabis companies suing cannabis companies. To read more about these cases, see the following posts: UPS Sues Multiple Cannabis Delivery Companies for Trademark Infringement What NOT to do with your Cannabis Brand: The
Our California hemp lawyers have been getting pummeled with questions about the legality of industrial hemp derived cannabidiol (“Hemp CBD”) ever since the 2018 Farm Bill was signed in January. One of the most frequent questions we receive is whether CBD is a lawful additive in foods. The answer is often no depending on the
