LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

FTC v KEVIN TRUDEAU Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CaseNo: FVKT97948, CourtCode: FED, CourtName: FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, Plaintiff: FTC, State: IL Illinois, UniqueCaseRef: LCD>FVKT97948, Federal Trade Commission, Defendant Kevin Trudeau, Kevin Trudeau, Ftc Act, Complaint, Stipulated Order, Judgement, Permanent Injunction, Practices, Deceptive Acts, Violation, Trade Commission Act, Mega Memory System, Relief, Entry, United States, Pursuant, Representations Set, Paragraph, Sable Hair Farming, Reading, Affecting Commerce, Sale, Representation, Distribution, Advertising, District Court, Substantiates, Purifying Product, Infomercials, Addiction Breaking, Injunctive Relief , ContentID: 120247479

Case Documents
1   STIPULATED ORDER
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 117840
14 pages
HTML
2   COMPLAINT
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 117839
24 pages
HTML
Total Documents: 2 documents , 38 pages
Price: $ 24.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . STIPULATED ORDER

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
STIPULATED ORDER
JUDGEMENT
PERMANENT INJUNCTION
TRADE COMMISSION ACT
COURT
ENTRY
PURSUANT
SALE
REPRESENTATION
SUBSTANTIATES
UNITED STATES
COMPLAINT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT
EQUITABLE RELIEF
MATTER
FTC ACT
PERFORMANCE BOND
CONNECTION
PLAINTIFF
VIOLATIONS
ESCROW ACCOUNT
SUBSIDIARIES
DISTRIBUTION
AFFECTING COMMERCE
ADVERTISING
PROMOTION
ADVERTISEMENT
CONSUMER REDRESS
                    IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                   FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
                              EASTERN DIVISION

                         FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION,

                                 Plaintiff,

                                     V.

                        KEVIN TRUDEAU, individually,

                                 Defendant.

                              Civil Action No.

    STIPULATED ORDER FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND FINAL JUDGMENT AGAINST
                               KEVIN TRUDEAU

   Plaintiff, the Federal Trade Commission ("Commission"), has filed a
   complaint for a permanent injunction and other equitable relief in
   this matter, pursuant to Section 13(b) of the Federal Trade Commission
   Act ("FTC Act"), 15 U.S.C. §§ 53(b), charging defendant Kevin Trudeau
   with violations of Sections 5 and 12 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 45
   and 52. The Commission, by and through its counsel, and defendant
   Kevin Trudeau have agreed to the entry of this Stipulated Order for
   Permanent Injunction and Final Judgment by this Court in order to
   resolve all matters of dispute between them in this action. The
   Commission and Kevin Trudeau have consented to entry of this
   Stipulated Order for Permanent Injunction and Final Judgment without
   trial or adjudication of any issue of law or fact herein.

   NOW, THEREFORE, defendant Kevin Trudeau and the Commission have
   requested the Court to enter this Stipulated Order for Permanent
   Injunction and Final Judgment. It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND
   DECREED as follows:

                                  FINDINGS
    1. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this case
       and all parties hereto.
    2. This is an action by the Commission instituted under Sections 5
       and 13(b) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 45 and 53(b). Pursuant to
       Sections 5 and 13(b), the Commission has authority to seek the
       relief it has requested.
    3. Concurrently herewith, plaintiff filed its complaint for a
       permanent injunction and other equitable relief in this matter,
       pursuant to Section 13(b) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 53(b).
    4. Defendant Kevin Trudeau has waived all claims under the Equal
SNIPPETS:
  • STIPULATED ORDER FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND FINAL JUDGMENT AGAINST
  • Plaintiff, the Federal Trade Commission, has filed a complaint for a permanent injunction and
  • The Commission, by and through its counsel, and defendant Kevin Trudeau have agreed to the
  • This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this case and all parties hereto.
  • This is an action by the Commission instituted under Sections 5 and 13of the FTC Act, 15
  • Pursuant to Sections 5 and 13, the Commission has authority to seek the relief it has
  • Concurrently herewith, plaintiff filed its complaint for a permanent injunction and other
  • This Stipulated Order for Permanent Injunction and Final Judgment does not constitute and
  • "In or affecting commerce" shall mean as defined in Section 4 of the Federal Trade Commission
  • IT IS ORDERED that defendant, directly or through any corporation, subsidiary, division, or
  • IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant, directly or through any corporation, subsidiary, eficit disorder to substantially improve their memory unless, at the time the representation is
  • Nothing contrary to, inconsistent with, or in mitigation of the disclosure shall be used in
  • Nothing in this order shall be constituted as a waiver of defendant's right to engage in
  • The bond shall cite this Order as the subject matter of the bond and provide surety against
  • Such performance bond shall be an insurance agreement providing surety issued by a surety
  • Defendant Trudeau shall pay all costs associated with the creation, funding, operation, and
  • Defendant Trudeau may not disclose the existence of the performance bond or escrow account to ment of charges that defendant Trudeau engaged in false and misleading representations.
  • Notify the Commission in writing at least thirty days prior to the effective date of any

  • 2 . COMPLAINT

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    FTC ACT
    DEFENDANT
    PRACTICES
    COMPLAINT
    DECEPTIVE ACTS
    VIOLATION
    MEGA MEMORY SYSTEM
    RELIEF
    REPRESENTATIONS SET
    PARAGRAPH
    COURT
    FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
    SABLE HAIR FARMING
    READING
    UNITED STATES
    DISTRICT COURT
    PURIFYING PRODUCT
    INFOMERCIALS
    PLAINTIFF
    ADDICTION BREAKING
    INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
    AFFECTING COMMERCE
    ILLINOIS
    COMPLAINT EXHIBIT
    ADDICTION BREAKING TECHNIQUE
    ADVERTISING
    DISTRIBUTION
    HAIR LOSS
    IMPLICATION
    
                        IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                       FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
                                  EASTERN DIVISION
    
                             FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION,
    
                                     Plaintiff,
    
                                         V.
    
                            KEVIN TRUDEAU individually,
    
                                     Defendant.
    
                                  Civil Action No
    
                COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE AND OTHER EQUITABLE RELIEF
    
       Plaintiff, the Federal Trade Commission ("FTC" or "Commission"), for
       its complaint alleges as follows:
    
       1. The Commission brings this action under section 13(b) of the
       Federal Trade Commission Act ("FTC Act"), 15 U.S.C. § 53(b), to secure
       preliminary and permanent injunctive relief, rescission of contracts,
       restitution, disgorgement, and other equitable relief for defendants'
       unfair and deceptive acts and practices in violation of Sections 5(a)
       and 12 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § § 45(a) and 52.
    
                               JURISDICTION AND VENUE
    
       2. This Court has jurisdiction over this matter under 28 U.S.C.
       1331, 1337(a), and 1345, and under 15 U.S.C. § § 45(a)(1) and 53(b).
    
       3. Venue in the United States District Court for the Northern District
       of Illinois is proper under 28 U.S.C. § § 1391(b) and (c) and 15
       U.S.C. § 53(b).
    
                                     PLAINTIFF
    
       4. Plaintiff, the Federal Trade Commission, is an independent agency
       of the United States Government created by statute. 15 U.S.C. § 41 et
       seq. The Commission is charged, inter alia, with enforcement of
       Sections 5(a) and 12 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § § 45(a) and 52.
       Section 5(a) of the FTC Act prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or
       practices in or affecting commerce. 15 U.S.C.§ 45(a). Section 12 of
       the FTC Act prohibits the dissemination or the causing to be
       disseminated of any false advertisement in order to induce the
       purchase of food, drugs, devices, or cosmetics. The Commission is
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
  • COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE AND OTHER EQUITABLE RELIEF
  • Plaintiff, the Federal Trade Commission, for its complaint alleges as follows:
  • The Commission brings this action under section 13of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15
  • Venue in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois is proper
  • Plaintiff, the Federal Trade Commission, is an independent agency of the United States
  • The Commission is charged, inter alia, with enforcement of Sections 5and 12 of the FTC Act,
  • Section 5of the FTC Act prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting
  • Defendant Kevin Trudeau is a former employee of Mega Systems International, Inc., an
  • At all times pertinent to this complaint, defendant has resided or transacted business in
  • At all times relevant to this complaint, defendant Kevin Trudeau has maintained a substantial FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 44.
  • Defendant's advertisements include, but are not limited to, program-length radio and
  • Since at least 1993 through 1996, defendant Kevin Trudeau participated in the advertising,
  • (Complaint Exhibit A)
  • Since at least 1993 through 1995, defendant Kevin Trudeau participated in the advertising,
  • Since at least 1994 through 1995, defendant Kevin Trudeau participated in the advertising,
  • Since at least 1992 through 1996, defendant Kevin Trudeau participated in the advertising,
  • Through the use of the statements referred to in Paragraphs 9 and 10, and others not
  • Sable Hair Farming System will stop, prevent, cure, relieve, reverse or reduce hair loss.
  • Absent injunctive relief by this Court, defendants are likely to continue to injure consumers
  •    |