Final November the Success by Well being defendants appealed to the Ninth Circuit, looking for to overturn the granted preliminary injunction.
On July twenty sixth the Ninth Circuit submitted its resolution, affirming the District Court docket’s resolution to disclaim the movement to dissolve the preliminary injunction.
The Ninth Circuit’s resolution was filed on the FTC v. Success by Well being case docket on September twenty second.
In affirming the choice to disclaim the Success by Well being defendants permission to dissolve the preliminary injunction, the Ninth Circuit wrote;
Regardless of the absence of any ruling from the Supreme Court docket on the time this enchantment was filed, Defendants-Appellants argue that the Court docket’s grant of the petition for writ of certiorari in AMG Capital Administration, LLC v. FTC, constituted a major change within the legislation.
The district court docket appropriately concluded on the contrary, and we affirm its denial of the movement to dissolve or modify the preliminary injunction.
When the AMG resolution was handed down earlier this yr, it was broadly celebrated by corporations engaged in litigation with the FTC.
The assumption that the AMG resolution would consequence within the collapse of FTC circumstances nevertheless has confirmed misguided.
Whereas we have now seen restrictions positioned on financial penalties, the FTC is nonetheless seeing the circumstances to conclusion.
Having upheld the preliminary injunction, the Ninth Circuit punted the difficulty again to the District Court docket, writing;
We depart it to the district court docket within the first occasion to contemplate whether or not and to what extent the choice in AMG Capital Administration, LLC v. FTC, bears on the preliminary injunction.
Whereas the District Court docket beforehand expressed concern relating to jurisdiction absent a call by the Ninth Circuit, on September twenty third a brand new order granted the preliminary injunction and asset freeze.
IT IS ORDERED that:
(1) The FTC’s movement for preliminary injunction with asset freeze and receivership is granted.
(2) The Particular person Defendants’ movement to dissolve preliminary injunction and keep or dismiss § 13(b) proceedings is denied.
The brand new preliminary injunction and asset freeze circumvents the AMG resolution.
(The FTC’s) movement basically seeks to maintain in place the preliminary injunction that was issued in February 2020 by figuring out extra grounds for aid that aren’t implicated by AMG Capital.
The Court docket has already discovered, within the abstract judgment order, that the Particular person Defendants dedicated the alleged § 19 violations and are answerable for any financial hurt arising from these violations.
The Particular person Defendants’ legal responsibility as to the § 19 claims has already been established through abstract judgment.
The underside line is that the FTC has superior a non-frivolous motive why a considerable damages award could also be within the offing within the close to future.
The Particular person Defendants’ dissolution and dismissal arguments are based mostly on a defective premise.
Furthermore … the now-established § 19 violations justify the asset freeze.
With respect to the SBH defendants’ try to dissolve the Receivership, on the idea financial aid through Part 13(b) was off the desk, the court docket wrote;
The Court docket agrees with the FTC that AMG Capital doesn’t undermine the receivership part of the unique order granting a preliminary injunction.
The aim of the receivership was not merely to protect property in anticipation of a future award of financial cures pursuant to the FTC’s § 13(b) claims—on the contrary, a key motive why the Court docket imposed the receivership was to stop ongoing and future hurt, by ousting the Particular person Defendants from their administration positions in entities that have been seemingly functioning as pyramid schemes and making false revenue representations.
In associated information, Success by Well being’s authorized crew is falling aside.
Final month one of many Success by Well being defendant’s attorneys moved to withdraw from the case.
The said motive is the legislation agency representing the defendants had cut up into two smaller companies.
The movement to withdraw was granted on September twenty second. This left the Success by Well being defendants with two attorneys.
This in itself wasn’t newsworthy. However on October 1st, one of many remaining attorneys filed a movement to withdraw.
The said motive for the requested withdrawal was
the financial influence of this court docket’s orders on the person defendants’ capacity to pay for a authorized protection.
Each the FTC and the previous receiver (who was additionally counsel for the company defendants) have vigorously argued in opposition to any try to allow the person defendants entry to their property to make use of for residing or authorized bills.
Sadly, this implies continued illustration of the person defendants will end in an unreasonable monetary burden on (the legislation agency), which can not proceed because it has for a lot of, many months, if it continues to work with out cost of the numerous lots of of hundreds of {dollars} owed.
It appears the legislation agency was banking, no pun meant, on court docket choices going their manner.
Primarily based on court docket filings, we’d beforehand realized Jay Noland (proper) had raised slightly below $600,000 from SBH associates to cowl authorized charges.
Whether or not that cash has been exhausted (or alternatively spent on different issues), is unclear.
In response to the withdrawal movement;
The person defendants have retained new counsel to signify them on this matter.
Given the movement was solely filed yesterday, it has but to be granted.
The Success by Well being’s new authorized crew has but to file an look.
On September twenty third the Success by Well being defendants additionally filed a movement for reconsideration of the abstract judgment order.
A choice on that movement is predicted later this month.
Replace twenty fourth October 2021 – The legal professional withdrawal movement was granted on October nineteenth.
Replace thirtieth October 2021 – The movement for reconsideration of the abstract judgment order has been denied.