LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

FTC v MILLENNIUM INDUSTRIES INC Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CaseNo: FVMII162971, CourtCode: FED, CourtName: FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, Plaintiff: FTC, State: AZ Arizona, UniqueCaseRef: LCD>FVMII162971, Judgement, Consumers, Commission, Telemarketing, Deangelis, Anthony, Sales, Millennium Industries, Ftc Act, Complaints, Officers, Act, Credit Card, Telemarketing Sales Rule, Federal Trade Commission, Entry, Permanent, Pursuant, Violations, Relief, Practices, Injunction, Employees, Credit Card Protection, Purposes, Stipulate, Compliance, Misrepresenting, Materials, Independent Contractor, Representatives, District, Arizona, Unauthorized Charges, Defendant Millennium, Complaint, Equitable Relief , ContentID: 120247512

Case Documents
1   STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 131043
17 pages
PDF
2   COMPLAINT
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 117899
6 pages
HTML
Total Documents: 2 documents , 23 pages
Price: $ 24.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
JUDGEMENT
DEANGELIS
ANTHONY
SALES
COMMISSION
CONSUMERS
MILLENNIUM INDUSTRIES
TELEMARKETING
PLAINTIFF
COURT
COMPLAINTS
OFFICERS
ENTRY
FTC ACT
BUSINESS
PERMANENT
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
TELEMARKETING SALES RULE
PURSUANT
INJUNCTION
EMPLOYEES
CREDIT CARD
PURPOSES
STIPULATE
COMPLIANCE
MISREPRESENTING
MATERIALS
INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
REPRESENTATIVES
                                       UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
                                          DISTRICT OF ARIZONA




 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION,

                        Plaintiff,
                                                             Case No. 01-1932-PHX-MHM
                               v.

 MILLENNIUM INDUSTRIES, INC.,
            a corporation, d/b/a PREMIER
            CONSUMER SERVICES and

 ANTHONY V. DEANGELIS,
            individually and as an officer and
            director of the corporation,

                        Defendants.




  STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION

          Plaintiff, the Federal Trade Commission ("FTC"), commenced this action by filing its

pursuant to Sections 13(b) and 19 of the Federal Trade Commission Act ("FTC Act"), 15 U.S.C.

§§ 53(b) and 57b, charging the defendants Millennium Industries, Inc. ("Millennium") d/b/a Premier

Consumer Services and Anthony V. DeAngelis with engaging in deceptive acts and practices in

violation of Section 5 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45, and the FTC's Telemarketing Sales Rule, 16

C.F.R. Part 310.

          Plaintiff, through its counsel, and defendants Millennium and Anthony V. DeAngelis, by and

through their counsel, have agreed to the entry of this Final Judgment and Order by this Court in


                                                   Page 1 of  18


to resolve all matters in dispute in this action.  The Commission and the defendants have consented

SNIPPETS:
  • ANTHONY V. DEANGELIS,
  • STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION
  • Plaintiff, the Federal Trade Commission, commenced this action by filing its complaint
  • §§ 53and 57b, charging the defendants Millennium Industries, Inc. d/b/a Premier
  • violation of Section 5 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45, and the FTC's Telemarketing Sales
  • have agreed to the entry of this Final Judgment and Order by this Court in order
  • This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this case and all parties hereto;
  • Telemarketing Sales Rule;
  • "Credit Card Loss Protection Services" means services provided for a fee which hold
  • consumers harmless for any unauthorized charges on their credit card accounts.
  • receiving or responding to consumer complaints;
  • DeAngelis, and their successors, assigns, directors, officers, agents, servants, employees,
  • Misrepresenting, expressly or by implication, that defendants are affiliated with,
  • Provided, however, that this judgment shall be suspended until further order of the Court
  • the Commission stipulate is the amount of consumer injury caused by the
  • Solely for the purposes of reopening or enforcing this Paragraph,
  • MONITORING COMPLIANCE OF SALES PERSONNEL
  • in connection with any business where such defendant is the majority owner of the business
  • independent contractor is involved;
  • E. Copies of all sales scripts, training materials, advertisements, or other marketing
  • directed by the FTC's authorized representatives, mail all written notifications to the

  • 2 . COMPLAINT

    EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
    CONSUMERS
    ACT
    TELEMARKETING
    CREDIT CARD
    FTC ACT
    VIOLATIONS
    COMMISSION
    RELIEF
    PRACTICES
    TELEMARKETING SALES RULE
    COURT
    CREDIT CARD PROTECTION
    PLAINTIFF
    FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
    DISTRICT
    ARIZONA
    BUSINESS
    UNAUTHORIZED CHARGES
    DEFENDANT MILLENNIUM
    COMPLAINT
    EQUITABLE RELIEF
    AFFECTING COMMERCE
    CREDIT CARD ACCOUNTS
    NUMEROUS INSTANCES
    REPRESENTATIONS
    CARD ISSUING INSTITUTION
    TRUTH
    GOODS
    INJURY
    
       William E. Kovacic
       General Counsel
    
       Gary D. Kennedy
       Suite 2150
       1999 Bryan Street
       Dallas, Texas 75201
       Okla. Bar No. 4961
       (214) 979-9379 (voice)
       (214) 953-3079 (facsimile)
       Attorney for Plaintiff
       Federal Trade Commission
    
       UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
       DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
    
                        FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, Plaintiff,
    
                                         v.
    
         MILLENNIUM INDUSTRIES, INC., a corporation, d/b/a PREMIER CONSUMER
       SERVICES and ANTHONY V. DEANGELIS, individually and as an officer and
                      director of the corporation, Defendants.
    
                                      Case No.
    
                COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE AND OTHER EQUITABLE RELIEF
    
       Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission ("FTC" or "Commission") for its
       complaint alleges:
    
       1. The FTC brings this action under Sections 13(b) and 19 of the
       Federal Trade Commission Act ("FTC Act"), 15 U.S.C. §§  53(b) and 57b,
       and the Telemarketing and Consumer Fraud and Abuse Prevention Act
       ("Telemarketing Act"), 15 U.S.C. § 6101 et seq., to obtain permanent
       injunctive relief, rescission of contracts, restitution, disgorgement,
       and other equitable relief for defendants' deceptive acts or practices
       in violation of Section 5(a) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. §  45(a), and
       the FTC's Trade Regulation Rule entitled "Telemarketing Sales Rule,"
       16 C.F.R. Part 310.
    
                               JURISDICTION AND VENUE
    
       2. Subject matter jurisdiction is conferred upon this Court by 15
       U.S.C. §§ 45(a), 53(b), 57b, 6102(c), and 6105(b) and 28 U.S.C.
       1331, 1337(a), and 1345.
    
       3. Venue in the District of Arizona is proper under 15 U.S.C.
    
    SNIPPETS:
  • Attorney for Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission
  • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
  • director of the corporation, Defendants.
  • COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE AND OTHER EQUITABLE RELIEF
  • The FTC brings this action under Sections 13and 19 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 e," 16 C.F.R. Part 310.
  • The Commission enforces Section 5of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45, which prohibits unfair or
  • The Commission also enforces the Telemarketing Sales Rule, 16 C.F.R. Part 310, which
  • The Commission may initiate federal district court proceedings by its own attorneys to enjoin
  • Defendant Millennium transacts or has transacted business in the District of Arizona.
  • Since at least July, 2000, under their assumed name Premier, defendants have fraudulently
  • Defendants have told consumers that consumers credit card numbers are being stolen, and that
  • In numerous instances, defendants have claimed that, if a consumers credit card number is
  • In truth and in fact:
  • Defendants are not affiliated with, or calling from or on behalf of, a credit card issuing
  • Therefore, defendants representations, as set forth in Paragraph 14, are false and misleading
  • The Rule prohibits telemarketers and sellers from misrepresenting any material aspect of the
  • CONSUMER INJURY
  •    |