WASHINGTON, Sept 16 (Reuters) - A case involving the

vape industry gives the U.S. Supreme Court a chance to further

erode the authority of federal regulatory agencies following

other major rulings as the justices gird for a new term

featuring important business-related questions.

The nine-month term, which begins on Oct. 7, also brings

cases involving tech giants Nvidia ( NVDA ) and Meta's

Facebook that could make it harder for private plaintiffs to win

securities fraud lawsuits against companies in federal courts.

The vape industry case is the latest front in a regulatory

rollback effort in the courts cheered by conservatives and

business interests to weaken the federal agency bureaucracy that

interprets laws, crafts federal rules and implements executive

action.

The Supreme Court, in a June 28 decision powered by its 6-3

conservative majority, overturned a legal principle called

"Chevron deference" established by the justices 40 years ago

that had called on judges to defer to federal agencies in

interpreting laws they administer. That case involved an

industry challenge to a U.S. regulatory agency's fish

conservation program.

The new case does not carry the same high stakes but

nonetheless affords the conservative justices an opportunity to

scrutinize actions of a regulatory agency, in this case the U.S.

Food and Drug Administration's denial of applications to sell

flavored vape products.

The justices in June also issued rulings faulting actions by

the Securities and Exchange Commission and Environmental

Protection Agency. Additional cases challenging federal agencies

have the potential to reach the justices this term.

The court will hear the FDA's appeal of a lower court's

ruling that the agency failed to follow proper legal procedures

under federal law when it denied applications by e-cigarette

liquid makers Triton Distribution and Vapetasia to bring their

nicotine-containing products to market.

The companies had filed FDA applications in 2020 for

products with flavors such as sour grape, pink lemonade and

crème brulee, and names including "Jimmy The Juice Man

Strawberry Astronaut" and "Suicide Bunny Bunny Season."

Although the FDA maintains that it has not categorically

banned flavored e-cigarette products, companies seeking its

approval must clear a high legal bar because, according to an

agency court filing, such products pose a "known and substantial

risk to youth." The FDA has approved only 27 e-cigarette

products - all tobacco or menthol flavored - while denying more

than a million other applications.

"The FDA case is another attack on agency authority and

power, so it seems a bit in keeping with the seminal cases from

last term that stripped agencies of various powers or left them

more open to attack," said Karen Woody, a professor at

Washington & Lee University School of Law in Virginia.

The court has not yet set a date for arguments in the case.

SECURITIES FRAUD CASES

The justices will hear separate bids by Facebook and Nvidia ( NVDA )

to fend off federal securities fraud lawsuits. The Supreme Court

already has weakened the federal agency that polices securities

fraud - the Securities and Exchange Commission. These new cases

now could make it more difficult for private litigants to hold

companies to account for alleged securities fraud.

"These cases represent new opportunities for the Supreme

Court to narrow the pinhole - so even fewer federal fraud claims

can proceed past the early stages - or widen it," said Ann

Lipton, a professor at Tulane Law School in Louisiana.

Facebook and Nvidia ( NVDA ) filed separate appeals after a lower

court allowed class action securities fraud lawsuits to proceed

against them.

The justices on Nov. 6 are due to hear arguments in

Facebook's bid to dismiss a lawsuit accusing the social media

platform of misleading investors in 2017 and 2018 about the

misuse of its user data by the company and third parties.

The court is due on Nov. 13 to hear arguments in a similar

effort by Nvidia ( NVDA ) to scuttle litigation accusing the artificial

intelligence chipmaker of misleading investors about how much of

its sales went to the volatile cryptocurrency industry.

Woody said the business community should take heed given the

weighty stakes. Woody added that she expects the court to rule

in favor of the companies in both cases. She joined a court

brief favoring Facebook.

"The Nvidia ( NVDA ) and Facebook cases read together could end up

with companies needing to disclose more information and

plaintiffs with a slightly lower bar for pleading requirements

in a class action," Woody said. "That combination could have

companies worried about a potential increase in liability

exposure."

University of Nevada, Las Vegas law professor Benjamin

Edwards said the court's momentous term that ended in July

continues to reverberate.

"I suspect the story in the business community for the next

few years will be how to adjust" to the new legal landscape,

Edwards added.

Anat Alon-Beck, a professor at Case Western Reserve

University School of Law in Ohio, said the business community is

likely to try to build on its considerable success in recent

terms of "gutting regulatory agencies' ability to create and

enforce rules on industry."