A federal judge directed procedural consolidation of eight civil cases filed by the Alliance of Legal Cannabis Entities‑DC, LLC (ALCE) against a number of unlicensed cannabis retailers and property owners in the District of Columbia.
Since September 2024, ALCE — a group formed by licensed cannabis operators in D.C. — has brought a series of lawsuits (over 170) in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, challenging alleged unlicensed cannabis sales and related conduct by dispensary defendants and the property owners who leased space to them. The complaints are rooted in claims under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, a federal trademark and unfair competition statute, as well as common‑law claims of unfair competition and negligence. The Lanham Act claims allege that defendants falsely marketed and sold cannabis products as legal, causing competitive harm to licensed businesses.
The eight cases filed by ALCE involve many of the same legal questions and overlapping factual issues. In each action, the plaintiffs seek injunctions to stop the sale of unlicensed cannabis, monetary relief tied to defendants’ profits and other remedies. ALCE has also named dozens of landlords, asserting that by leasing space to unlicensed retailers they contributed to the challenged conduct.
On March 12, 2026, U.S. District Judge Loren L. Alikhan issued an order consolidating all eight actions for the purpose of briefing and deciding a single motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b). Under the order, all filings must reference every case number, and defendants are to present one joint motion raising shared grounds for dismissal. Plaintiffs and defendants will respond and reply to that motion under a unified schedule established by the court.
The consolidation directive does not merge the cases for trial or dispose of their individual identities. Rather, it is intended to streamline the early stages of litigation by addressing common legal arguments in a single round of briefing. The court has deferred decisions on further consolidation, potential class certification, or other case‑management matters until after the motion to dismiss is resolved.
By centralizing the motion practice, the judge aims to reduce duplicative filings and promote judicial efficiency while allowing defenses tied to particular defendants to remain part of the record.
