Key Takeaways
- The Delta Munchies lawsuit showcases issues with hemp COAs and differing lab results on THC content.
- Retailers’ reliance on COAs may expose them to legal risks when products fail independent testing.
- A COA can vary in meaning based on how it’s generated, not always guaranteeing compliance or safety.
- Measuring delta-9 THC versus total THC complicates compliance due to conversion during vaping.
- Retailers must verify COA accuracy and testing methods to mitigate risks and avoid legal repercussions.
A North Texas smoke shop dispute is now testing one of the most uncomfortable questions in the hemp industry. If a distributor hands a retailer a certificate of analysis saying a product is legal, and a retailer stocks it in good faith, what happens when a completely different lab, or a police department, tests the same product and gets a completely different answer?
That is the situation facing Abdelhamid Ajak, Feras Ajak, and their company Skyrise Forney LLC. According to court filings, the trio is fighting to keep alive a lawsuit against Delta Munchies LLC, the maker of the 2g Lil Ripper Liquid Diamond THCA Vape. The suit alleges the company misrepresented the product’s THC content and legal status, a claim that allegedly led directly to police raids, felony arrests, and millions in seized assets.
What the Lawsuit Actually Alleges
The plaintiffs say Delta Munchies marketed the Lil Ripper vapes as “Farm Bill compliant,” meaning less than 0.3% delta-9 THC by dry weight, and pointed to certificates of analysis as proof. Relying on those representations, the shop owners bought and resold the vapes at their North Texas stores.
Then, according to the complaint, law enforcement made undercover purchases in January 2025. Testing on those purchases allegedly showed illegal delta-9 THC levels. Coordinated raids followed on the plaintiffs’ businesses and homes. Officers reportedly seized inventory, cash, vehicles, and electronics, and froze or seized approximately $4.8 million in personal and business funds. Police arrested both owners and charged them with first-degree felony manufacture and delivery of a controlled substance.
The plaintiffs later commissioned independent lab testing on Lil Ripper products purchased directly from Delta Munchies. Those tests allegedly found delta-9 THC “far in excess” of the federal 0.3% threshold, along with undisclosed HHC and other THC isomers. Perhaps most striking: at least one tested unit reportedly contained no detectable THCA at all.
Delta Munchies disputes the allegations and has moved to dismiss the case. The plaintiffs filed their response on September 21, and the court has yet to issue a ruling. A jury trial is currently scheduled for November 2027 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, according to the case docket.
This isn’t the first time Delta Munchies has drawn regulatory scrutiny. In 2023, the company was one of six businesses to receive FTC and FDA cease-and-desist letters over delta-8 THC edibles packaged to resemble Doritos and Nerds candy. That earlier action centered on marketing and packaging concerns, not testing accuracy, so it’s a separate issue from the current lawsuit. But it’s part of the company’s regulatory history worth noting.
Why a COA Isn’t Always What It Looks Like
Here’s the part of this story that matters far beyond one Texas courtroom: a certificate of analysis is not a single, uniform guarantee. It can mean very different things depending on how it was generated and what it actually covers.
A COA can be batch-matched, meaning the document describes the exact lot sitting on a shelf. Alternatively, a seller may use a representative COA, where they tested a sample once, at an earlier point, under different conditions. A QR code on packaging proves that a PDF exists somewhere. It does not prove that PDF describes the product a customer is holding.
The lot date and the test date are two separate pieces of information, and the gap between them tells its own story. A certificate that’s “available on request” wasn’t published before the batch went out the door, and a seller who waits to be asked is a seller who has time to figure out what to send.
There’s also the question of what a COA actually measures. A complete certificate includes multiple panels: potency, pesticides, heavy metals, residual solvents, microbials, and mycotoxins. A document showing only potency numbers is missing most of the protection a real COA is supposed to provide.
Delta-9 vs. Total THC: A Measurement Problem, Not Just a Legal One
Much of the confusion in cases like this traces back to how THC gets measured in the first place. The 2018 Farm Bill sets the legal hemp threshold at 0.3% delta-9 THC by dry weight, but it says nothing about THCA, the non-intoxicating acidic precursor that converts to delta-9 THC when heated through vaping or smoking.
The conversion follows a known ratio: total THC equals delta-9 THC plus 0.877 times the THCA percentage. A product can look compliant on a delta-9-only test and still convert to well over the legal limit once decarboxylated. Testing methodology compounds the issue. High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) runs at low temperature and reports THCA and delta-9 THC separately. Gas chromatography (GC) applies heat during testing, which converts some THCA to delta-9 THC before the instrument ever produces a reading. The same sample can generate two different compliance answers depending on which method the lab used.
As attorney at Harris Sliwoski noted regarding USDA testing standards, gas chromatography “tends to increase the THC concentration in the hemp sample and pushes it over the 0.3 percent limit.” The blog also highlights that most jurisdictions still lack the resources to reliably tell hemp from marijuana at the point of enforcement. This means that a retailer’s compliance can depend on which lab tested the sample, which method they used, and even which day they ran the test.
What This Means for Retailer Due Diligence
For a retail hemp business, this case functions as a real-world stress test of an uncomfortable reality: a supplier’s COA is a starting point for due diligence, not a finish line. Retailers looking to reduce exposure are increasingly taking steps to verify a few basics before restocking a product line.
Make sure the certificate matches the specific lot you’re purchasing and not a generic sample tested months earlier. Check the testing method listed on the document, since HPLC and GC can produce different compliance outcomes from the same material. Compare the lab’s accreditation and reputation, since not all testing labs apply the same rigor. Track and record when you received each COA relative to when the product hit the shelf, that timeline can matter if a dispute arises later.
None of this guarantees a retailer will never face a supply chain problem. But in the Ajak case, the alleged gap between what the paperwork said and what independent and police testing found is exactly the scenario that turns a routine shipment into a $4.8 million legal fight.
What Happens Next?
The Delta Munchies case is still in its early stages. The court has yet to rule on the motion to dismiss. The parties will complete discovery by April 2027 and face a jury trial in November 2027. Whatever the outcome, the underlying tension it exposes isn’t going away. As long as hemp compliance depends on a threshold measured in fractions of a percent, tested by methods that can disagree with each other, retailers will keep absorbing risk that originates somewhere else in the supply chain.
Shops that want to stay ahead of that risk should treat every COA as a document to verify, not simply file away. Confirming batch-matching, testing method, and lab credibility before a product hits the shelf costs far less than defending against a raid after the fact.
Frequently Asked Questions
Texas smoke shop owners are suing Delta Munchies, claiming the company falsely marketed its Lil Ripper THCA vapes as Farm Bill compliant. Independent and law enforcement testing later revealed that the certificates of analysis provided by Delta Munchies were inaccurate.
Retailers can face serious legal consequences for inaccurate COAs, even when relying on supplier documentation. As a result, retailers are increasingly taking responsibility for verifying COA accuracy themselves.
The 2018 Farm Bill sets a 0.3% limit on Delta-9 THC, but total THC also includes THCA, which converts to THC when heated. This means a product can pass a Delta-9-only test but still exceed legal limits once that conversion is factored in.
HPLC tests at low temperature, reporting THCA and delta-9 THC as separate values. GC testing applies heat to the sample, which converts some THCA into delta-9 THC before taking the reading — often pushing the delta-9 result higher than other testing methods would show.
Yes. In 2023, Delta Munchies was one of six companies that received FTC and FDA cease-and-desist letters over delta-8 THC edibles packaged to look like popular snack brands. That action was about marketing and packaging — a separate issue from the current lawsuit’s THC testing allegations.
