AMG decision puts Redwood injunction on the line
As per our last update, Jason Cardiff had been given until May to secure VPL Medical mask contracts.
Failing which the Redwood Receiver had been directed to cease funding the company’s operation.
Since then we’ve also had the AMG Supreme Court decision, further complicating proceedings.
As per a filed April 28th Joint Report, the Receiver writes that “as of April 28, 2021, no sales contracts have been executed.”
In light of this, the FTC has moved the court to wind up the VPL Receivership.
Without a monthly injection of $200,000+, this will likely see VPL promptly collapse.
There is mention of a possible buy out but, given all the promises Cardiff has made regarding VPL thus far, it’s difficult to take anything seriously.
Just over a year ago the Cardiff’s lost their family home. It was supposed to be sold off but those efforts have since been suspended.
There has been no material change in the status of the Cardiff residence in the Receiver’s opinion and judgment.
The Receiver concluded last year that it was unlikely that continuance of the marketing effort for the residence would yield a material benefit for the estate.
Accordingly, the Receiver notified the Court and the parties that it had suspended the marketing effort.
When the listing agreement by the Receiver’s real estate broker expired in November 2020 it was not extended or renewed.
The Receiver has not changed its evaluation that given the likely prices to be obtained for a sale of the residence, the deteriorated state of the property, and the amounts owed that are secured by liens against the property, there is unlikely to be a material benefit from a sale.
With respect to the AMG decision, the Cardiffs are pushing for vacation of the preliminary injunction and winding up of the Receivership.
The Cardiffs also want the FTC to either reimburse them or the Receiver for fees already paid.
Because the receivership was established to freeze corporate and personal assets for restitution to consumers, the receivership must be dissolved and the remaining assets returned to their rightful owners.
The FTC argue that the status quo can be preserved through Section 19 of the FTC Act, and summary judgment.
In light of the Supreme Court’s decision in AMG, the Commission is no longer entitled to monetary relief under Section 13(b) of the FTC Act for Counts IXII, XIV, and XVI.
For these counts, the FTC continues to seek the injunctive relief specified in the proposed final judgment submitted at summary judgment.
The Commission is still entitled to monetary relief on Count XIII of the complaint – the ROSCA violations – because monetary relief for that count has a basis independent of Section 13(b).
It’s messy but in a nutshell, the FTC has provided alternatives for relief given that 13(b) is now off the table.
The Commission respectfully submits that all assets currently frozen and controlled by the Receiver pursuant to the November 2018 Cardiff Preliminary Injunction must be preserved at this time.
Both parties have requested permission to file briefs on issues pertaining to the AMG decision.
The FTC has requested the status quo at the very least be maintained until briefs have been filed.
Given the Cardiffs’ history of lying and failing to account for their assets (indeed, they remain in contempt of the Court’s Order to account for their assets), the equities tip heavily in favor of retaining the asset freeze pending full briefing on these issues.
On May 4th the court ordered
- the Receiver to wind up receivership over VPL Medical by May 7th;
- a hearing on the status of VPL for May 21st;
- both the Cardiffs and FTC to file briefs on AMG decision issues, with a hearing scheduled for June 18th; and
- the current preliminary injunction remain in place till at least the June 18th hearing.
I’ll continue to monitor the case docket for updates.
Update 19th May 2021 – Ran a docket check today. Case is a total mess. There’s objections to objections and a ton of back and forth squabbling.
The VPL hearing for May 21st is still on, as is the June 18th preliminary injunction hearing (if required).
I figure it’s best to wait for court orders as the mess the AMG decision has created is otherwise headache inducing.
I’ll check the docket again on May 22nd for an order re. VPL. After which our next update will likely be around June 18th.
Update 28th May 2021 – The court has issued a roadmap for the eventual discharge of the VPL Receivership.