LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

FTC v MII INVESTMENT CORP Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CaseNo: FVMIC129723, CourtCode: FED, CourtName: FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, Plaintiff: FTC, State: IL Illinois, UniqueCaseRef: LCD>FVMIC129723, Act, Franchise, Ftc Act, District, Sales, Earnings, Violations, Practices, Commission, Purchasers, Relief, Deceptive Acts, Federal Trade, Freedom Jet, Prospective Franchisees, Earnings Claim, Complaint, Unfair, Affecting Commerce, Illinois, Consumers, Representations, Profits, Basis, Disclosure, Substaneiating, Offering , ContentID: 120247511

Case Documents
1   COMPLAINT
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 117898
7 pages
PDF
Total Documents: 1 document , 7 pages
Price: $ 19.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . COMPLAINT

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
FRANCHISE
DEFENDANTS
FTC ACT
DISTRICT
SALES
EARNINGS
VIOLATIONS
PRACTICES
COMMISSION
COURT
PURCHASERS
RELIEF
DECEPTIVE ACTS
BUSINESS
FEDERAL TRADE
FREEDOM JET
PROSPECTIVE FRANCHISEES
EARNINGS CLAIM
COMPLAINT
UNFAIR
AFFECTING COMMERCE
ILLINOIS
CONSUMERS
REPRESENTATIONS
PROFITS
BASIS
DISCLOSURE
SUBSTANEIATING
OFFERING
          .^  _
        .^_
        .-_                                                        .
                                    UNITED  STATES DISTRICtI'  COURT                               
                                   NORTHERN        DISTRICT       OF  ILLINOIS
                                              EASTERN  DIVISION                          &CEwED



FEDERAL  TRADE  COMMZSSION,

                             Plaintiff,                                  Case  No,:

                                       V.
                                                                         COMPLAKkT          FOR
Mn  INvEsTMlENT              CORP.,                                      PERMANENT          
        d/b/a  Moore's  Industries,  Inc.;  and                          AND  OTHER  EQUITA%iE
                                                                         RELIEJ?
GARY  WARREN  MOORE,  individually                    and  as
        an  officer  of  the  above-named  corporation;




        Plaintiff,  the  Federal  Trade  Commission  ("FTC"  or  "the  Commission"),  for  its

complaint  alleges:

        1.          The  FTC  brings  this  action  under  Sections  13(b)  and  19  of  the 

Commission  Acr  ("FTC  Act"),  15  U.S.C.  48 53(b)  and  57b,  to  secure  a permanent 

restitution,  disgorgemenr,  and  other  equitable  relief  for  defendants'  unfair  or  deceptive

practices  in  violation  of  Section  5(a)  of  the  FTC  Act.  15 U.S.C.  5 45(a).


        2.          This  Court  has jurisdiction  over  this  matter  pursuant  to  28  U.S.C.  $3

1337(a)  and  1345,  and  15  U.S.C.  $4  53(b)  and  57b.



I  -
:,                                                         :



                   3.       Venue  in  the  United  States District`Court  for  the  Northern 
SNIPPETS:
  • Plaintiff, the Federal Trade Commission, for its
  • Commission Acr ("FTC Act"), 15 U.S.C. 48 53and 57b, to secure a permanent injunction,
  • Venue in the United States District`Court for the Northern District of IXinois is
  • which prohibits unfair or deceptive acrs or practices in or affecting commerce.
  • Commission is authorized to initiate federal district court proceedings to enjoin violations
  • the FTC Act in order to secure such equitable relief as may be appropriate in each case.
  • Defendant MII Investment Corp., an Illinois corporation with its
  • soId area distributorships for the sale of the Freedom Jet needleless insulin injection
  • MII has transacted business in the Northern District of IlLinois.
  • times mar&al to this complaint, acting alone or in concert with others, he has formulated,
  • At all times relevant to this complaint, the defendants have maintained a
  • distributorships, in or affecting commerce, as "commerce" is defined in Section 4 of the FTC
  • description of the "Area Distributor Program" that promises profits of over $3OO,OOO a year.
  • a franchise constitute deceptive acts or practks prohibited by Section 5of the FTC Act
  • In the course of offering for sale and selling Freedom Jet area disuibutorships,
  • defendants have represented, directly or by implication, that purchasers could reasonably
  • expect to achieve a specific level of sales or earnings, such as sales of 47 Freedom Jets per
  • sales or earnings represented by the defendants.
  • The defendants' sales and earnings representations were not average estimates of the sales or
  • and bad no reasonable basis in fact in the actual sales or earnings of area distributors.
  • Disclosure of this information enables a prospective franchisee
  • franchiser provide ta prospective franchisees a document containing information substaneiating
  • conjunction with any generally disseminated earnings claim, disclose the material basis (or
  • this Court, the defendants are likely to continue to injure consumers and harm the public
  •    |