Federal Trade Commission v. Netfran Development Corp.

508 F. Supp. 2d 1194, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39632
CourtDistrict Court, S.D. Florida
DecidedMay 14, 2007
Docket05-22223-CIV
StatusPublished

This text of 508 F. Supp. 2d 1194 (Federal Trade Commission v. Netfran Development Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Federal Trade Commission v. Netfran Development Corp., 508 F. Supp. 2d 1194, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39632 (S.D. Fla. 2007).

Opinion

FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION AS TO DEFENDANTS NETVERTISE, INC., AND ELLIOT KRASNOW

UNGARO-BENAGES, District Judge.

Plaintiff, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC” or “Commission”), filed a Complaint on August 11, 2005, seeking a Permanent Injunction and Other Relief, including redress to consumers, pursuant to Sections 13(b) and 19(a) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (“FTC Act”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 53(b) and 57b(a).

The Commission alleged that Defendants engaged in deceptive acts and practices in violation of Section 5 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(a), and the Commission’s Rule entitled Disclosure Requirements and Prohibitions Concerning Franchise and Business Opportunity Ventures (the “Franchise Rule”), 16 C.F.R. Part 436, in the marketing and sale of an alleged business opportunity to sell Internet services to small businesses. Defendants have denied all allegations of wrongdoing in the Commission’s complaint, have contested the Commission’s authority to seek certain requested relief, and have denied any liability in any amount under any theory asserted by the Commission.

The Commission and undersigned Defendants hereby stipulate to the entry of, and request the Court to enter, this stipulated Final Judgment and Order for Permanent Injunction (“Final Order”) to resolve all matters of dispute between them in this action without a trial on the merits, presentation of evidence or further judicial proceedings.

FINDINGS OF FACT

IT IS THEREFORE STIPULATED, AGREED, AND ORDERED as follows:

1. This Court has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this case and jurisdiction over the Defendants.

2. Venue in this District is proper under 15 U.S.C. § 53(b) and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b) and (c).

3. The activities of Defendants are in or affecting commerce, as defined in Section 4 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 44.

4. The Complaint states a claim upon which relief may be granted under Section 5(a) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(a), and the Commission’s Franchise Rule.

5. Defendants have entered into this Final Order freely and without coercion. Defendants further acknowledge that they have read the provisions of this Final Order and are prepared to abide by them.

*1196 6. The Plaintiff and Defendants agree that the entry of this Final Order resolves all matters of dispute between them arising from the conduct which is the subject of the Complaint in this action, up to the date of entry of this Final Order.

7. Defendants waive all rights to seek appellate review or otherwise challenge or contest the validity of this Final Order. Defendants further waive and release any claim they may have against the Commission, its employees, representatives, or agents.

8. Defendants agree that this Final Order does not entitle Defendants to seek or to obtain attorneys’ fees as a prevailing party under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412, as amended by Publ. 104-121, 110 Stat. 847, 863-64 (1996), and Defendants further waive any rights to attorneys’ fees that may arise under said provision of law.

9. This Final Order is in addition to, and not in lieu of, any other civil or criminal remedies that may be provided by law.

10. Entry of this Final Order is in the public interest.

11. This Final Order is for settlement purposes only, and does not constitute an admission by Defendants that the law has been violated as alleged in the Complaint, or that the facts alleged in the Complaint, other than jurisdictional facts, are true.

DEFINITIONS

1.“Business venture” means any written or oral business arrangement, other than a business arrangement covered by the Franchise Rule or Business Opportunity Rule, however denominated which consists of the payment of any consideration for:

A. The right or means to offer, sell, or distribute goods or services (regardless of whether identified by a trademark, service mark, trade name, advertising, or other commercial symbol); and
B. More than nominal assistance to any person or entity in connection with or incident to the establishment, maintenance, or operation of a new business or the entry by an existing business into a new line or type of business;

2. “Franchise Rule or Business Opportunity Rule” means:

A. The FTC Trade Regulation Rule codified at 16 C.F.R. Part 436, until the effective date of the amendments to the FTC Trade Regulation Rule titled “Disclosure Requirements and Prohibitions Concerning Franchising and Business Opportunity Ventures,” approved by the Commission on January 22, 2007,;
B. After the effective date of the amendments to the FTC Trade Regulation Rule titled “Disclosure Requirements and Prohibitions Concerning Franchising and Business Opportunity Ventures,” approved by the Commission on January 22, 2007:
1. The FTC Trade Regulation Rule titled “Disclosure Requirements Concerning Franchising,” to be codified at 16 C.F.R. Part 436, or as it may be amended; and
2. The FTC Trade Regulation Rule titled “Disclosure Requirements concerning Business Opportunities,” to be codified at 16 C.F.R. Part 437, or as it may be amended.

3. “Investment Opportunity” means any interest, product or service, other than a business arrangement covered by the Franchise Rule or Business Opportunity Rule, including any partnership, interest in any partnership, stock or other beneficial interest, tangible or intangible, that is offered for sale, traded or sold to consumers based, wholly or in part, on material representations, express or implied, that the *1197 interest, product or service may generate financial return or appreciate in value;

4. “Corporate Defendant” means Netver-tise, Inc. and its successors, assigns, affiliates or subsidiaries, but not including Ariel Way, Inc., Netfran Development Corp., or Netspace International, Inc.;

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
508 F. Supp. 2d 1194, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39632, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/federal-trade-commission-v-netfran-development-corp-flsd-2007.