Jason Cardiff furious over losing VPL Medical
Two days after assuming control of VPL Medical, the Redwood Receiver shut it down.
Jason Cardiff was furious, prompting a twenty-eight page rage filing demanding removal of the Receiver.
Spoiler alert: Cardiff was denied.
We’ve previously covered Cardiff’s VPL Medical scheme, so I won’t go to deep into it again here.
At issue was a July 14th deadline, requiring VPL Medical to supply the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services with two million COVID-19 masks.
Following a “surprise visit” to VPL Medical’s manufacturing facilities, the Redwood Receiver concluded the company wouldn’t be able to meet its contractual obligations.
VPL has no more than 1 functioning manufacturing machine, which is old and is not functioning well.
That machine is not capable of manufacturing more than 8,000 to 10,000 masks during any given 8- hour shift.
Three of the other machines are used machinery, lacking key parts, and are non-functional.
The Receiver also relied on a statement from Matthew Peters, VPL’s primary investor, confirming
VPL would not be ready to produce 2 million FDA-compliant masks by the HHS contract deadline.
Jason Cardiff argues the Receiver’s decision was based on the “false claim” that there ‘were not enough production lines available to manufacture masks.’
Simply stated, the Receiver has created a double bind for VPL; that is, you need to meet the HHS deadlines, but don’t provide the funds to pay VPL’s Engineer and fund workers to operate the production lines.
In an attempt to circumvent the court order, Cardiff threw money at the FTC.
VPL and Jason Cardiff made offers to the FTC to settle the case.
The offers are far more than the FTC would get if they destroy VPL.
The FTC however suspected Cardiff wasn’t good for the money, and demanded settlement upfront.
Cardiff took this request personally, claiming
the FTC’s inability to see that some risk might be necessary to fund a settlement illustrates the inflexible attitude of agency officials who are not concerned about the constituency they purportedly serve.
He even went so far as to frame the FTC as standing in the way of ‘HHS’s ability to protect the public from the hazards of the Coronavirus.’
The court rejected Cardiff’s arguments, falling back on the reasoning the VPL Medical preliminary injunction was granted.
Reminiscent of their arguments against the Court’s July 7 Preliminary Injunction, Cardiff and VPL have not provided a legal basis on which to remove the Receiver.
The Receiver has been ordered to “[c]onserve, hold, manage, and prevent the loss of all VPL Assets, and perform all acts necessary or advisable to preserve the value of those Assets.”
Based on the information before the Receiver, the Receiver did not clearly violate its fiduciary duty or its Court-ordered obligation to prevent loss of VPL Assets by spending money to fulfill a contract that appeared to be doomed to fail.
Moreover, removing the Receiver at this stage would cause the estate irreparable harm, as the Court has already amply explained its concerns of asset dissipation (and Cardiff and VPL’s proposed order seeks to pay $20,000 per month to both Bedi and Cardiff, without temporal limitation or explanation).
The Court thus does not find that the equities require terminating the Receiver’s responsibilities over VPL.
Nor have Cardiff and VPL stated with sufficient particularity based on credible facts what the Court should order the Receiver to do in the alternative.
Criticising communication between the parties, concern was expressed over the filing of
legally baseless ad hominem attacks and last-minute applications to the Court.
The Receiver has been ordered to file a report detailing the current status of VPL Medical’s HHS contract.
The court’s order was made on July 16th. As at the time of publication a report hasn’t been filed.
In related news, the FTC has signaled it intends to file for summary judgment with respect to the Redwood case.
This is through a motion requesting permission to file a longer than allowed memorandum in support of summary judgment. The Cardiffs have opposed the motion.
A decision on the FTC’s request remains pending.
Cardiff is certainly entertaining, I’ll say that much. But he frankly doesn’t seem very bright.
Is he so used to getting his way that he can’t understand it won’t happen this time?
Is he so blind to his own record as to think the FTC owes him the benefit of the doubt that he’ll pay what he owes?
What is he smoking?
Can I have some?
I hope Cardiff continues to dig a deeper hole.
No idea what his motive is but I’m glad he’s taking us along for the ride. This legal smackdown is hilarious.
He has reacted no differently than Faith Sloan did to her cease and desist order.
She thinks the law doesn’t apply to her and neither does Jason Cardiff.
In fact all the major Ponzi owners and pimps think they are above the law and have done nothing wrong.
This guy is nuts! WTF
abc7.com/archive/7666364/
skepticalinquirer.org/exclusive/the-woman-who-took-on-popoff-the-hidden-story-of-crystal-sanchez-the-peter_/
Been following this case for a while and things are really heating up.
I have just read the FTC summary judgment motion and they claim that Cardiff only received $347,000 in non-income compensation, and did not get any payroll.
It gets better. Cardiffs team are now showing that he and his wife are the largest investors in Redwood the company being sued.
Further this entire time I have been following this case and now I found out that the MLM that Cardiff had never launched or so they say. (( does any one know if that is true did anyone join )).
Mean while Cardiffs team claims under some new Liu Ruling in the Supreme Court that the FTC is not entitled to any funds for restitution more than Cardiff got as a form of compensation based on the Law of Equity.
Now I just looked up Cardiffs Lead council Steve Cochelle seems he is headed to the Supreme Court on a different case against the FTC same issue as Cardiff.
Basically 13B does not allow for any restitution to be paid to the FTC. Funny thing Steve beat the FTC in the 7th circuit on the same issue with his client Credit bureau. Now it seems the Supreme Court has combined the that case to be argued with the FTC-AMG case.
I mean guys this thing is a legal master piece. From the other blogs I have read about the Liu case and the Credit case it seems the FTC may have some challenges ahead
Few things here first off does anyone know if that is true about Cardiff he only got $347,000 in benefits over 4 years that like 80k a year?
What a nut I am like you guys if I had not read it in FTC filing I would not have believed it I thought this guy was making millions.
Bottom line this thing will be studied for years in law school.
Given the financial shenanigans that have come to light so far, obviously Cardiff didn’t just make $347,000 over four years.
They’ve blown through hundreds of thousands in violation of the prelim injunction alone.
I remember reading the Supreme Court arguments were rejected, paving the way for the FTC to file for summary judgment earlier this month.
As for the MLM company, if it’s RengaLife then that was very much launched. BehindMLM reviewed RengaLife in April 2018. It’s the reason we’re following this case.
Perhaps you’re not understanding what I was asking First has anybody or did anyone ever join this MLM because we can’t find anybody and it’s interesting.
Second I don’t think you fully grasp that from what I’m reading on the docket schedule. It looks like the Cardiff‘s have filed with the appellate court and there is no paving the way for summary judgment, it happens regardless.
I think this might be your own blog and you’re definitely a New Zealand-based as I’m in Law student in New York your blog is great however I’m trying to get to the bottom of this case and as I said it will be studied for years.
The $347,000 is the FTC‘s number the real question is what happens now because of Lou and the supreme court ruling further as strange as this sounds but in the United States the local circuits are not allowed to adopt us Supreme court ruling until it’s been challenged in another case which unusually as everything in this strange case is happened with Yang and the remanding of another case back to the district level court.
Bottom line we have a long way to go here and once again I’m wondering if you or any of your followers or anybody on this site or active in the supposed multi level marketing at the Cardiif’s claim never launched.
I tried to look up the site but I couldn’t find it I do appreciate all your hard work.
RengaLife launched and was promptly shut down following the FTC action. Whether anyone joined or nor is another issue.
You can launch an MLM and have nobody join.
Summary judgment has been filed for and doesn’t happen regardless. It’s a choice the filing parties make to file for it.
Re. Supreme Court, I remember reading in one of the denial filings pertaining to the Cardiffs (can’t remember which one, they’ve been steamrolled so many times now), that some cited Supreme Court case didn’t overrule the FTC’s right to seek consumer redress as per the FTC Act in this specific case.
Whether the FTC gets summary judgment we’ll have to wait and see.
You are clearly mistaken Rengalife as I read went dark 4 months prior to the action and as I read never could take orders.
Are you saying you were a member ??
As for MSJ I read it as part of the courts calendar.
Just a cursory glance shows the Supreme Court case mentioned is Liu vs. the SEC, and thus not about the FTC.
I’m sure the Cardiff’s legal team would like to muddy the waters by trying to drag it in, but it is about what specific powers the SEC has, not about other US government agencies, like the FTC, or the US government in general.
Baruck:
It isn’t just, or primarily, Redwood that is being sued. The suit is against the Cardiffs personally, an associate of theirs, Danielle Cadiz, and various companies owned and operated by them, Redwood Scientific Technologies being only one of those.
As the FTC put it, the three of them “have for years operated a fraudulent multi-pronged scheme”, and the RengaLife MLM scam was just the latest such prong, which they’d only launched months before the FTC lawsuit hit them.
Whether or not by then any significant fraudulent activity had taken place using that particular label is pretty immaterial. As is exactly how money was moved around between the various shell companies they used. It’s all the Cardiffs + Cadiz, there is no meaningful distinction between their personal finances and those of the companies.
That’s why the supposedly new and separate company, VPL Medical, which didn’t exist when the FTC lawsuit began, and which the Cardiffs specifically set up to try and keep their scamming going, this time going for stealing money from the US government with a COVID-19-themed fraud, was simply considered part of the Cardiffs’ assets, and added to the Redwood receivership.
I wonder what makes you think that their lawyers’ continuing pathetic attempts to pretend that the Cardiff’s corporate shell games matter constitute a “legal masterpiece”.
Once again you have not seen the latest order of the Court 8-29 this is what makes this so interesting you say and I quote.
The court has just ordered the receiver to work with Cardiff and someone named Bedi and further to pay them to get this VPL-Medical up and running eventually.
it is the largest 3 ply mask company in North America. Further if you read the recver report he state the business was running lawfully and profitable when they took over. Even more intersting no one found any fraud.
It is truly a Made in the USA mask company that now the court and receiver think can make 250,000 masks per day. Part of the question is what scam do they keep going if the court and the receiver agree to run the business.
As I have said this is a very interesting case with very interesting Law it is clear this VPL had nothing to do with REdwood other than Cardiff (but ware is the scam ) and even better I know you are the MLM wizard that is why I reached out in the first place.
can you find anyone who joined this MLM Cardiffs claim the web site was for test purposes and it was shut down 4 months before the FTC took action.
Also do you think its true Cardiffs made no money as sited by the FTC in there MSJ it all seems strange.
We are also looking for any one scammed by this MLM since the FTC has not been able to put one person forward.
As a Blog writer why are able to make these claims of fraud if the FTC and the court have agreed to reopen this VPL place seems
Sorry to bother you Passingby;
one more thought you may be able to help clear up. since the FTC and the receiver have not been able to identify any revenue from any of the companies as you say the Et al going to the Cardiffs and both groups agree the Cardiffs wrote checks payable to Redwood in the amount over over 1 Mil USD and then they state Redwood lost 6.3 mil.
we are just looking for what you see that even out of the words of the receiver and the FTC are so very different for our writing on this.
It just seems to come down to this Liu case regarding Equity and disgorgement I am not sure if you are up on the Yang case either but now the 9th circuit court of appeals is sending cases back to the district court level based on Liu for proper calculations of restitution and equitable relief.
one more quick question;
we are rengalife “dumbname” was last on line Aug 20th 2018 2 full months prior to the litigation not as you keep saying was shut down after the FTC took action. Seems Cardiffs or this Cadzie shut it down.
we just want to make sure we are correct this is what we found on the wayback machine and is consistent with cardiffs MSJ but once again if this is true it is very strange.
showing: web.archive.org/web/collections/20181201000000*/www.rengalife.com
That’s from the Receiver in July, 2020.
Based on that, VPL doesn’t sound like “the largest 3 ply mask company in North America”. No idea where you got that from.
The scamming as it pertains to VPL was grossly misrepresenting to the govt how many masks they could manufacture with one aged barely functioning machine.
BehindMLM reviewed RengaLife on April 13th, 2018. News of the FTC investigation broke on April 18th.
The Cardiffs knew they were under investigation since at least August 2017.
RengaLife might have failed as an MLM company, but to pretend it never launched is disingenuous.
If there’s new filings you’ll have to give me a bit. I had my next docket check slated for Sep 2nd, I’ll bump it up and get back to you.
Looking at the docket now…
The Cardiffs want to stay the case pending another appeal. They’ve had every appeal filed thus far denied.
Stipulated briefing has been granted but no date set (last reply is September 1st so sometime after that).
Non-party Inter/Media Time Buying Corporation failed to get the Receiver to pay the Cardiff’s residence mortgage costs.
The Cardiffs have attempted to purge contempt by filing declarations on August 29th. The Cardiffs are proven liars so until the FTC or the court signs off on these declarations, take anything in them with a grain of salt.
I’ll hold off reporting until the court and/or the FTC makes a further filing on the Cardiffs declarations (no point reporting if the declarations are full of baloney, as has been the case in the past).
To what extent VPL is profitable going forward as of August 2020, the Receiver’s report on that is sealed. You don’t know how profitable VPL is or isn’t, neither do I.
Cardiff getting any money out of VPL hinges on negotiations with the FTC, as well as approval by the court. So one way or another we’ll find out the accuracy of their contempt declarations over the coming weeks.
I’ve scheduled my next docket check for next Monday (Sep 7th).
Thanks for the response let me know when you’re going to have a little free time and you can answer the other questions this is very interesting.
Did you find out anything on the MLM dates.
I told you, we reviewed RengaLife on April 13th, 2018. News of the FTC investigation broke on April 18th.
The Cardiffs knew they were under investigation since at least August 2017.
RengaLife was operational as of April 13th, i.e. it launched. When they shut it down doesn’t matter.
I see you mean April 2018.
Also any insight in the other questions fraud you aight in vpl and other stuff you seem very close to this case do you know these Cardiff’s I heard they had offices in Australia and nz.
I suggest you read our RengaLife articles if you’re interested in a recap.
https://behindmlm.com/companies/rengalife/
Where do you get this complete nonsense from?
Cardiff set up VPL in April 2020, trying to cash in on the US government’s mass buying of COVID-19 related stuff, without the normal public tendering process (basically lots of government agencies were falling over each other, panic buying). He used one Bobby Bedi as a beard, in an attempt to hide this activity, and the resultant money, from the government, thus violating his injunction.
VPL managed to get a contract for supplying masks to the Veterans Administration within days of being created, and another one with HHS a day later. All without ever having manufactured or sold a single mask, or ever having undertaken any other kind of business activity. That VA contract they did indeed fulfill, by supplying masks imported from China.
In June, VPL sent out a press release claiming they were planning on setting up production of masks in the US. In July, the Receiver took a look and found they had acquired some old machinery. There is one machine that is partially functional, and a few more that don’t work at all. Please note that we’re talking about disposable three-ply surgical masks here, which are simply rectangular pieces of cloth sewn together plus some string, so these machines are just regular industrial sewing machines, not anything specific to masks. That was the total of VPL’s manufacturing capability, as of less than two months ago: one barely functioning second-hand sewing machine.
Even if they were capable of making 250,000 masks per day: the population of North America is 579 million. Providing each of them with just one such disposable, short-term use mask would therefore take your “largest 3 ply mask company in North America” 6 years and four months, assuming they work 7 days a week.
The fraud is that Cardiff kept this business, and the money it took in and therefore landed in his pockets, secret, in gross violation of the injunction he is under.
If they presented the Chinese-made masks they imported as being American-made, though, that would also be fraud. That happens to be one of the many forms of fraud the Cardiffs engaged in, for other products they’ve sold over the years: passing off cheap Chinese imports as being made in the US.
As to your continuing to go on about the Supreme Court Liu decision, and now adding a mention of the Yang case: once again, those are securities cases, where what powers the SEC has came under scrutiny. Which is totally irrelevant to this case.
While we’re on that subject:
You wouldn’t be able to provide us with a link substantiating this bizarre claim, would you? It doesn’t even make sense internally: a SCOTUS decision doesn’t take effect until it’s been challenged in a lower federal court???
You can provide evidence of your claim – can’t you ?
Not that I’m accusing you of posting nonsense – it’s just that I can’t seem to find any reference linking VPL / Cardiff with being the “largest” anything
Not sure about the claim part I think we read but we have not been able to find anyone with a line larger than one piece of equipment.
Ok thank you.
We agree with SCOTUS and yes the 9th circuit has been remanded to use the Liu case in the Yang case. As we see this it’s a big issue for FTC and all the agencies this is a big issue.
natlawreview.com/article/liu-look-disgorgement-ninth-circuit-vacates-sec-disgorgement-award
it appears now that the 9th circuit has sent the first case back to the district court the first case based on Liu and SCOTUS.
Looks like the bottom line is Cardiff’s are in luck regarding Disgorgement plus disgorgement or any form of equitable remedy.
Guys, I just need to make sure this is not some fake lead gen site and why don’t you guys answer questions?
I don’t see any questions remaining to be answered. A few questions have been directed to you (namely requests for proof of your claims), none of which you’ve answered.
Any comprehension problems seem to be on your side.
Looks like Cardiff is in luck for sure on disgorgement lets see what happens. 3rd Circuit has stripped the FTC power of restitution under 13B.
natlawreview.com/article/third-circuit-deals-blow-to-ftc-disgorgement-authority
Looks like it coming down to Credit Beuro and AMG in SC very soon. these guys are just lucky in timing as seems that the new SC nominee was part of the 7th Ciricut onBanc of Credit Beuro Center that strips the FTC in the 7th.
Seeing as prohibiting the FTC from recovering stolen funds from scammers because they stopped scamming before the FTC filed a complaint creates an omegalulz regulatory loophole, I’m pretty confident this will go nowhere in end.
I can see it now:
“How dare the FTC sue me! Sure I stole millions but the record clearly shows I shut down my company on the 13th. The FTC filed suit on the 14th!”
“Case dismissed!”
@OZ
not sure what you are talking about above. I was speaking to the fact of 13b and the 3rd circuit. perhaps you need to read it again.
Looks like Cardiff is in luck for sure on disgorgement lets see what happens. 3rd Circuit has stripped the FTC power of restitution under 13B.
natlawreview.com/article/third-circuit-deals-blow-to-ftc-disgorgement-authority
As to your comments about violate or about to violate seems Cardiff shut down months prior to litigation and it may still be wrong behavior however injective relief is forward looking.
Looks like it coming down to Credit Burro and AMG in SC very soon. these guys are just lucky in timing as seems that the new SC nominee was part of the 7th Circuit onBanc of Credit Burro Center that strips the FTC in the 7th.
let me know your thoughts if you have any on 13b and what is taking place it looks as if the FTC is out of luck on any 13b cases getting restitution or equitable relief.
I would go as far as to say I would make you a BET that the Supreme Court rules the FTC is not allowed restitution under 13b.
Lets make this the Reply that you will have to admit Baruck is was correct on the law. The Circuits in the US are falling into line already with the 3rd cirict above.
Motion for MSJ is in first time in History that the District court has not ruled for Restitution and or Disgorgement and no permeant injunctions. Cardiff’s owe ZERO only FTC case of its type.
Looks like you have some explaining to your members I know this is hard to understand its a bit over your non legal mind I can see.
Since you are a MLM expert and have been following this case for months this is what the district court found about the MLM only 200 members and it was halted after 3 months and no one lost money.
this site is a joke I have been following you thinking you know what you are doing you are a JOKE.
Explaining what? I’m covering the case for the popcorn. I don’t have skin in the game.
You meanwhile appear to be taking a personal interest in the case. Maybe it’s time to be honest?
In any event I’ve mentioned the relevant motion here:
https://behindmlm.com/companies/rengalife/vpls-viability-grossly-overstated-4-weeks-behind-schedule/
Even if the FTC has to pivot, we both know US courts aren’t going to let scammers keep the money they scam people out of.
Finally with respect to people losing money in RengaLife, nothing in what you quoted is the court acknowledging nobody lost money.
In fact this spells out that “nearly all RengaLife members” lost money;
The FTC’s action against Redwood shut RengaLife down before it got off the ground, but not before it harmed roughly 200 consumers. You seem to have a comprehension issue.
Oh, I see… you tried to post this under a different name but it got picked up as spam:
Gotta love people who present as “I’m in Law student in New York” but turn out to have personal connections to the case. Is anyone associated with Cardiff honest?