FTC v. Vemma Nutrition Company, No. CV-15-01578-PHX-JTT (D. Ariz. 2015)

©www.mlmlegal.com
Welcome to the MLMLegal.com Legal Cases Project.  Here you will find hundreds of legal cases in the fields of MLM, Direct Selling, Network Marketing, Multilevel Marketing and Party Plan. The cases span federal and state courts as well as administrative cases from the FTC, FDA, IRS, SEC, worker’s compensation, unemployment compensation, etc.

The intent of the MLMLegal.com Cases Project is strictly educational, and, to provide insight into the legal issues and cases for an industry that spans the globe in upwards of 150 countries with sales volume exceeding $100 billion and distributor involvement in the tens of millions. MLMLegal.Com does not promote or endorse any company. MLMLegal.Com offers no value judgments, either pro or con, regarding the companies profiled in legal cases.

Jeffrey A. Babener, principal attorney in the Portland, Oregon, law firm Babener & Associates, and editor of www.mlmlegal.com, represents many of the leading direct selling companies in the United States and abroad.

www.mlmlegal.com www.mlmlegal.com www.mlmlegal.com www.mlmlegal.com

FTC v. Vemma Nutrition Company, No. CV-15-01578-PHX-JTT (D. Ariz. 2015)

 

Case: FTC v. Vemma Nutrition Company (2015)

 

Subject Category: Deceptive/Misleading Conduct, Pyramid, Consumer Protection

 

Agency Involved: Federal Trade Commission

 

Court: U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona

 

Complaint Synopsis: The FTC alleged that Vemma Nutrition Company (Vemma) lured college students and other young adults with the prospect of getting rich through their website, social media tactics, and marketing materials that claimed affiliates could earn substantial income by enrolling others.  The FTC asserted that Vemma focused on recruitment rather than retail sales of its products to the ultimate users to generate distributor reward income. In addition to alleging that Vemma was running an illegal pyramid scheme, the defendants were charged with making false earnings claims, failing to disclose that Vemma’s structure ensured that most people who join will not earn substantial income, and furnishing affiliates with false and misleading materials to recruit others.

 

Order Granting Preliminary Injunction, Temporary Restraining Order, and Appointment of Monitor: The U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona granted the FTC’s request for a preliminary injunction which froze Vemma’s assets. The Court also granted the plaintiff a temporary restraining order which prohibited Vemma and its officers, agents, employees, and attorneys from engaging in, participating in, or assisting others in any MLM program. The court also appointed as a Receiver over the corporate defendants. The Receiver was given the authority to observe and ensure that Vemma complied with the injunction, and was granted access to all operations and records of the corporate defendants.

 

Practical Importance to Business of MLM/Direct Sales/Direct Selling/Network Marketing/Party Plan/Multilevel Marketing:  The FTC will consider a program to be an illegal pyramid in violation of Section 5 of the FTC Act if the facts show a program driven by rewards for recruitment, as opposed to a program emphasizing product sales to ultimate users.  To be on the safe side, a direct selling company should track the ultimate destination of product sales to the "ultimate user." As long as the emphasis of the program is on sales to nonparticipant retail customers there may be sales for personal use of participants in reasonable amounts. The facts should show the primary motivation for distributor purchases for sale to ultimate users and not to qualify in the plan for compensation.   If Direct Selling companies wish to avoid and be prepared to avoid scenarios similar to Vemma, companies must commit their resources to tracking the destination of product and to objectively assuring that product is bought in amounts that are reasonably needed rather than amounts to qualify in a plan for commissions. An MLM business must avoid making misrepresentations to distributors about potential earnings to avoid the risk an FTC suit similar to Vemma.

 

FTC v. Vemma Nutrition Company,  No. CV-15-01578-PHX-JTT (D. Ariz. Oct. 28, 2015): Vemma Nutrition Company is a multilevel marketing company (which earned over $200 million annually in 2013 and 2014) that claims to use its members (“affiliates”) to promote its health and wellness drinks. Vemma provided marketing materials to its affiliates showing young people in luxury cars, jets, and yachts, and falsely claimed affiliates earned up to $50,000 a week. The FTC alleged that consumer losses were inevitable because Vemma operated an illegal pyramid scheme that rewarded affiliates for recruiting participants rather than for selling products. The U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona granted the FTC’s request for a preliminary injunction which froze Vemma’s assets. The court also granted the FTC a temporary restraining order which prohibited Vemma and its officers, agents, employees, and attorneys from engaging in, participating in, or assisting others in any MLM program. The court also appointed as a Receiver over the corporate defendants. The Receiver was given the authority to observe and ensure that Vemma complied with the injunction, and was granted access to all operations and records of the corporate defendants. October 28, 2015, the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona denied Vemma’s request to approve its revised compensation plan. The case is currently pending.

 

 

www.mlmlegal.com www.mlmlegal.com www.mlmlegal.com www.mlmlegal.com

 

FTC v. Vemma Nutrition Company – Court Order Granting Preliminary Injunction, Temporary Restraining Order, and Appointment of Monitor

  

www.mlmlegal.com www.mlmlegal.com www.mlmlegal.com www.mlmlegal.com

FTC v. Vemma Nutrition Co., No. CV-15-01578-PHX-JTT (D. Ariz. Oct. 28, 2015):
United States District Court for the District of Arizona
October 28, 2015, Decided; October 28, 2015, Filed
No. CV-15-01578-PHX-JJT
Reporter
2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174826

Federal Trade Commission, Plaintiff, v. Vemma Nutrition Company, et al., Defendants.

Notice:
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

Counsel:  [1] For Federal Trade Commission, Plaintiff: Angeleque P. Linville, Anne Dorman LeJeune, Emily B Robinson, Jason C Moon, LEAD ATTORNEYS, Federal Trade Commission, Dallas, TX.

For Vemma Nutrition Company, a Corporation, Vemma International Holdings Incorporated, a Corporation, Defendants: Brian Ronald Booker, Edward Alipio Salanga, John Spencer Craiger, Kevin Duffy Quigley, LEAD ATTORNEYS, Quarles & Brady LLP - Phoenix, AZ, Phoenix, AZ; John Anthony Harris, LEAD ATTORNEY, Quarles & Brady LLP, Phoenix, AZ.

For Benson K Boreyko, Individually and as an Officer of Vemma Nutrition Company and Vemma International Holdings, Inc. also known as BK Boreyko, Defendant: John R Clemency, Lindsi Michelle Weber, LEAD ATTORNEYS, Gallagher & Kennedy PA, Phoenix, AZ.

For Tom Alkazin, an Individual, Bethany Alkazin, an Individual (Named as Relief Defendant), Defendants: Keith Beauchamp, Marvin Christopher Ruth, LEAD ATTORNEYS, Coppersmith Brockelman PLC, Phoenix, AZ.

For Robb Evans, Robb Evans & Associates LLC, Receivers: Gary Owen Caris, Lesley Anne Hawes, LEAD ATTORNEYS, Dentons US LLP - Los Angeles - Grand Ave., Los Angeles, CA; Joshua S Akbar, LEAD ATTORNEY, Dentons US LLP - Phoenix, AZ, Phoenix, AZ.

Judges: Honorable [2]  John J. Tuchi, United States District Judge.

Opinion by: John J. Tuchi

Opinion

ORDER
At issue is the Motion to Approve Revised Compensation Plan (Doc. 155, Mot.) filed by Defendants Vemma Nutrition Company and Vemma International Holdings, Inc. (collectively, "Vemma"), to which Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission ("FTC") filed a Response in opposition (Doc. 158, Resp.) supported by a Supplemental Declaration by Dr. Stacie Bosley (Doc. 158-1. Bosley Supp. Decl.). The Court heard oral argument on the Motion on October 21, 2015. (Doc. 159.) For the reasons that follow, the Court will deny the Motion.

In an effort to comply with the Court's September 18, 2015 Preliminary Injunction Order (Doc. 118) and the FTC Act, Vemma has proposed a new plan for the compensation of its Affiliates. (Mot. at 2; Doc. 155-1 at 2-13, Proposed Compensation Plan.) Under the plan, an Affiliate is defined as a participant who "intends to participate and earn rewards under Vemma's Marketing Plan," and a Customer is a participant who "is interested in purchasing and using" Vemma products. The plan makes some adjustments to the number of Personal Volume (PV) points required for an Affiliate to qualify for bonuses, and an Affiliate's own [3]  purchases of Vemma products do not earn the Affiliate qualifying PV points. Under the "51% Rule," full bonuses are paid to an Affiliate if 51% of the sales of the Affiliate's organization are to Customers. When less than 51% of sales are to Customers, an Affiliate is still paid a bonus, but the portion of the bonus resulting from sales to Affiliates may not exceed the bonus resulting from sales to Customers.
The FTC objects to Vemma's proposed compensation plan on the grounds that it still incentivizes recruitment of Affiliates over retail sales in violation of the Preliminary Injunction and the FTC Act. (Resp. at 2-7.) Specifically, the FTC argues that the 51% Rule is an insufficient anti-pyramiding safeguard because it provides an Affiliate significant compensation even if most of the Affiliate's sales are to downstream Affiliates, not Customers. (Resp. at 5-7.) This argument is premised on the presumption that a downstream Affiliate's own purchases of Vemma products will be motivated by income opportunities for upstream Affiliates and not personal consumption, [4]  leading to inventory loading. (Resp. at 2-5.) For its part, Vemma contends that if the economic behavior of Affiliates is rational, they will purchase products only because they want to consume them, not because they want to allow upstream Affiliates to earn bonuses. (Oct. 21, 2015 Hr'g Tr. at 35:16-24.) Vemma also states that it will not promote or develop new sales and marketing materials that incentivize Affiliates to buy products for income opportunities rather than for personal consumption. (Hr'g Tr. at 36:5-8.)

In assessing the foreseeability that Affiliates will continue to engage in inventory loading under the proposed compensation plan, the Court must consider that Vemma is a ten year-old company with an existing culture and history and that its thousands of existing Affiliates developed their businesses in an environment in which they were encouraged to purchase product not for personal consumption, but rather to give away as samples to potential new Affiliates, among other things. (See Bosley Supp. Decl. at 3.) In this context, it is foreseeable that Affiliates will perceive that the proposed compensation structure continues to hinge bonuses on Affiliate consumption, not [5]  sales to Customers, and they will behave accordingly. (See Bosley Decl. at 3.)

The principal defect with the proposed 51% Rule is that it does not provide any real disincentive for the majority of an Affiliate's sales to be to downstream Affiliates. Using the FTC's example, if 60% of the sales of an Affiliate's organization are to downstream Affiliates and not Customers, the Affiliate is still fully compensated for the 40% of sales made to Customers—even though they did not constitute most of the Affiliate's sales—and, more disconcertingly, the Affiliate is also compensated almost 40% more for the sales made to other Affiliates—even though those sales may in fact be inventory loading. The Affiliate thus earns nearly 80% of the compensation available even though most sales were made to Affiliates. (See Resp. at 6.)

Aside from the 51% Rule, the proposed compensation plan contains neither additional anti-inventory loading safeguards nor incentives to sell to Customers rather than Affiliates. By way of comparison, the multilevel marketing company Amway was not considered a pyramid scheme under the Koscot test in part because it enforced anti-inventory-loading safeguards that included requirements [6]  that at least 70% of the products bought by a distributor were sold to customers and that a distributor must sell products to at least ten different retail customers per month in order to earn a bonus; no bonus was paid if a distributor failed to meet these requirements. In re Amway Corp., 93 F.T.C. 618, 716 (1979). As discussed above, Vemma's proposed compensation plan would give Affiliates full bonuses for meeting a lower threshold of sales to customers—51% in the Vemma plan versus 70% in the Amway plan—and Vemma Affiliates would still earn potentially significant bonuses even when the 51% threshold is not met. Nothing like Amway's ten customer rule is present in Vemma's proposed compensation plan, nor does the plan include revised retail pricing or other incentives to encourage sales to Customers rather than Affiliates.

Because the 51% Rule can provide significant compensation to an Affiliate whose sales are principally to downstream Affiliates, who may well be inventory loading, and because the proposed compensation plan does not include other anti-inventory loading safeguards or otherwise incentivize sales to Customers rather than Affiliates, the proposed compensation plan does not meet the provisions of the Preliminary [7]  Injunction (Doc. 118) or go far enough to prevent pyramiding behavior that violates the FTC Act. The FTC suggests that the Court require that any plan proposed by Vemma only provide for the payment of a bonus to an Affiliate whose organization's sales to Customers are at least 51% of the total sales for the organization. (Resp. at 6.) While Vemma requested that the Court not dictate the terms of its compensation plan, the Court notes that the FTC's suggestion would serve to remedy the issues incumbent in the present 51% Rule.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED denying Vemma's Motion to Approve Revised Compensation Plan (Doc. 155).
Dated this 28th day of October, 2015.
/s/ John J. Tuchi
Honorable John J. Tuchi
United States District Judge

 

Footnotes

• The Court adopts its factual findings in the Preliminary Injunction Order (Doc. 118) to the extent they are applicable here.

FTC v. Vemma Nutrition Co., No. CV-15-01578-PHX-JJT, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 174826 (D. Ariz. Oct. 28, 2015)

FTC v. Vemma Nutrition Company – Press Release (08/26/2015)

FTC Acts to Halt Vemma as Alleged Pyramid Scheme

Promised Unlimited Income Potential, But Most Participants Lose Money
FOR RELEASE: August 26, 2015

At the Federal Trade Commission’s request, a federal court has temporarily halted an alleged pyramid scheme, Vemma Nutrition Company, that lures college students and other young adults with the prospect of getting rich without having a traditional 9-to-5 job. The FTC seeks to stop the operation, which earned more than $200 million annually in 2013 and 2014 and has affected consumers throughout the United States and in more than 50 other countries, from continuing as an unlawful pyramid.

“Rather than focusing on selling products, Vemma uses false promises of high income potential to convince consumers to pay money to join their organization,” said Jessica Rich, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “We are also alleging that Vemma is an illegal pyramid scheme.”

Vemma is a multilevel marketing company that claims to use its members, called “affiliates,” to promote its health and wellness drinks. According to the FTC’s complaint, the defendants claim affiliates can earn substantial income by enrolling others either as affiliates or as customers, but Vemma focuses on recruitment rather than retail sales of its products to generate this income. The vast majority of participants make no money, and most of them lose money.

According to the FTC’s complaint, the defendants’ websites, social media, and marketing materials show seemingly prosperous young people with luxury cars, jets, and yachts, and falsely claim that Vemma affiliates can earn substantial incomes – as much as $50,000 per week. The defendants allegedly claim that affiliates’ earning potential is limited only by their own efforts and that Vemma provides young adults an opportunity to bypass college and student loan debt. Vemma urges consumers to make an initial investment of $500-$600 for an “Affiliate Pack” of products and business tools, buy $150 in Vemma products each month to remain eligible for bonuses, and enroll others to do the same.
Consumer losses are inevitable because Vemma is an illegal pyramid scheme that rewards affiliates for recruiting participants rather than for selling products, the FTC alleges. The defendants provide affiliates little guidance for selling products, but instead teach them to give away products as samples when recruiting new participants. Vemma offers no meaningful discounts or incentives to encourage retail sales, according to the complaint.

In addition to allegedly running an illegal pyramid scheme, the defendants are charged with making false earnings claims, failing to disclose that Vemma’s structure ensures that most people who join will not earn substantial income, and furnishing affiliates with false and misleading materials to recruit others.
The defendants are Vemma Nutrition Company, Vemma International Holdings Inc., Tom Alkazin, and Benson K. Boreyko, who is under a 1999 court order after settling with the FTC for his involvement with New Vision International Inc.,  a multilevel marketing company that sold nutritional supplements. The complaint names Bethany Alkazin as a relief defendant who profited from the scheme. On August 21, 2015, the court halted the deceptive practices, froze the defendants’ assets, and appointed a temporary receiver over the business pending a trial.
The Commission vote authorizing the staff to file the complaint for permanent injunction was 5-0. The order was entered by the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona on August 21, 2015.

The FTC appreciates the assistance of the Attorney General Offices of Arizona, South Carolina, and Michigan, the Tempe Police Department, and the nonprofit organization Truth in Advertising in bringing this case.
To learn more about multilevel marketing, read Multilevel Marketing and Business Opportunity Scams.

NOTE: The Commission files a complaint when it has “reason to believe” that the law has been or is being violated and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. The case will be decided by the court.
The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish, visit the FTC’s online Complaint Assistant or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to more than 2,000 civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad. The FTC’s website provides free information on a variety of consumer topics. Like the FTC on Facebook
, follow us on Twitter, and subscribe to press releases for the latest FTC news and resources.

PRESS RELEASE REFERENCE: 
Multi-Level Marketing Company to Settle FTC Charges That It Made Unsubstantiated Claims That Its "God's Recipe" Dietary Regimen Could Cure ADD/ADHD

CONTACT INFORMATION
MEDIA CONTACT:
Frank Dorman
Office of Public Affairs
202-326-2674

STAFF CONTACT:
Angeleque Linville
FTC’s Southwest Region
214-979-9381

www.mlmlegal.com www.mlmlegal.com www.mlmlegal.com www.mlmlegal.com

FTC v. Vemma Nutrition Company – Complaint (08/17/2015)
Plaintiff, the Federal Trade Commission ("FTC"), for its Complaint alleges:

I. The FTC brings this action under Section 13(b) of the Federal Trade Commission Act ('"FTC Act"), 15 U.S.C. § 53(b), to obtain temporary, preliminary, and permanent injunctive relief, rescission or reformation of contracts, restitution, the refund of monies paid, disgorgement of ill-gotten monies, the appointment of a receiver, and other equitable relief for Defendants' acts or practices in violation of Section 5(a) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(a), in connection with the advertising, marketing, promotion, and sale of opportunities to sell health and wellness drinks.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE
2. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1337(a) and 1345, and 15 U.S.C. §§ 45(a) and 53(b).
3. Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. § 139l(b)(2) and (c)(2) and 15 U.S.C. § 53(b).

PLAINTIFF
4. The FTC is an independent agency of the United States Government created by statute. 15 U.S.C. §§ 41-58. The FTC enforces Section 5(a) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(a), which prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce.

5. The FTC is authorized to initiate federal district court proceedings, by its own attorneys, to enjoin violations of the FTC Act and to secure such equitable relief as may be appropriate in each case, including rescission or reformation of contracts, restitution, the refund of monies paid, and the disgorgement of ill-gotten monies. 15 u.s.c.§ 53(b).

DEFENDANTS
6. Defendant Vemma Nutrition Company is an Arizona corporation with its principal place of business at 1621 West Rio Salado Parkway, Tempe, Arizona 85281. Vemma Nutrition Company transacts or has transacted business in this district and throughout the United States. At all times material to this Complaint, acting alone or in concert with others, Vemma Nutrition Company has advertised, marketed, distributed, or sold business opportunities to consumers throughout the United States.

7. Defendant Vemma International Holdings, Inc. is an Arizona corporation with its principal place of business at 1621 West Rio Salado Parkway, Tempe, Arizona 85281 . Vemma International Holdings, Inc. transacts or has transacted business in this district and throughout the United States. At all times material to this Complaint, acting alone or in concert with others, Vemma International Holdings, Inc. has advertised, marketed, distributed, or sold business opportunities to consumers throughout the United States.

8. Defendant Benson K. Boreyko, also known as B.K. Boreyko ("Boreyko"), is the Chief Executive Officer, Secretary, and a director of Vemma Nutrition Company. He is also the President, Secretary, and a director of Vemma International Holdings, Inc.
At all times material to this Complaint, acting alone or in concert with others, Boreyko has formulated, directed, controlled, had the authority to control, or participated in the acts and practices set forth in this Complaint. Defendant Boreyko resides in this district 3 and, in connection with the matters alleged herein, transacts or has transacted business in this district and throughout the United States.

9. Defendant Tom Alkazin is a promoter of the business opportunities offered by Vemma Nutrition Company and Vemma International Holdings, Inc. At all times material to this Complaint, he has participated in the acts and practices set forth in this Complaint. Tom Alkazin resides in California and, in connection with the matters alleged herein, transacts or has transacted business in this district and throughout the United States.

10. Relief Defendant Bethany Alkazin is an individual who has received funds that can be traced directly to Defendants' deceptive acts or practices alleged below, and she has no legitimate claim to those funds. Bethany Alkazin resides with her husband, Defendant Tom Alkazin, in California.

COMMON ENTERPRISE
11. Defendants Vemma Nutrition Company and Vemma International Holdings, Inc. (collectively, "Vemma") have operated as a common enterprise while engaging in the deceptive and unlawful acts and practices alleged herein. Defendants have conducted the business practices described below through interrelated companies
that commingle funds and have common ownership, officers, directors, and office locations. Because Vemma has operated as a common enterprise, each entity is jointly and severally liable for the acts and practices alleged below.

COMMERCE
12. At all times material to this Complaint, Defendants have maintained a substantial course of trade in or affecting commerce, as "commerce" is defined in Section 4 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. §44.

DEFENDANTS' BUSINESS PRACTICES
13. Vemma, founded by Boreyko in 2004, is an international multilevel
marketing company that promotes health and wellness drinks through a network of independent distributors called "Affiliates." These products include health C' Vemma Health"), energy ("Verve"), and weight loss ("Bode") drinks (collectively, the "Vemma Products"), which all purport to contain the "VEI\1JV1A" formula of vitamins, essential minerals, mangosteen, and aloe.

14. Vemma Affiliates can earn financial and other rewards for building two ''teams" or "downlines" of individuals who also enroll with the company, either as an Affiliate, if the individual is interested in the purported money-making opportunities presented by enrolling others, or as a customer, if the individual is only interested in purchasing Vemma Products.

15. As evidenced by their sales and marketing activities and compensation plan, Defendants' business model depends upon recruiting individuals to participate in Vemma as Affiliates and encouraging them to purchase Vemma Products in connection with such participation, rather than selling products to ultimate-user consumers. Defendants' sales and marketing activities and their compensation plan place little emphasis on sales to consumers outside of the Vemma organization.

16. Using this business model, Vemma earned more than $200 million in annual revenues in 2013 and 2014.

Defendants' Sales and Marketing Activities
17. Defendants promote the Vemma program through a variety of channels,
including websites, videos, testimonials, print materials, social media tools, and live presentations and meetings, such as "opportunity events" and "home events." Opportunity events are meetings designed to motivate and train Affiliates and to recruit new Affiliates. High-level Affiliates, including Defendant Alkazin, typically host these events in hotel ballrooms, conference rooms, or convention centers around the country, and Defendants Boreyko and Alkazin often speak at these events. Home events are smaller recruitment meetings at an Affiliate's residence, dorm room, park, or other location.

18. Through each of these channels, Defendants pressure consumers to become Vemma Affiliates and to recruit others, including friends and family members, to do the same.

19. Vemma·s marketing efforts include a campaign called the "YPR," "Young People Revolution," or "Young Professional Revolution." which targets young adults, including college students. Defendants visit college campuses and present Vemma as a profitable alternative to traditional employment. Vemma's YPR marketing materials prominently feature young, seemingly affluent individuals surrounded by conspicuous displays of wealth, such as luxury vehicles, jets, and yachts.

20. Through their sales and marketing activities, Defendants misrepresent the nature and income potential of Vemma. Defendants repeatedly tout that Vemma can provide anyone an easy path to financial freedom and independence:
What's possible with a Vemma business?

Unlimited possibilities! We don't place any barriers ahead of you; we let you determine your own success. Achieve goals like obtaining financial freedom, receiving rewards and recognition, having more time for the things and people who matter the 1nost, enjoying flexible schedules, and taking the opportunity to be your own boss and define how much or little you want to make. If you can dream it, you can achieve it!

So if your dream is to run your own business, get out of debt, earn a secondary source of income, exchange the traditional 9 to 5 for your own schedule, or all of the above, Vemma's business opportunity can help you achieve it. Now is the best time to make a change and choose to live to your full potential.

Joining Vemma as an Affiliate affords you the opportunity to earn a second income WITHOUT a second job, and so much more!
My name is B.K. Boreyko, and a big part of my job here at Vemma is to help people create a full-time income with part-time effort, to offer hope to those wanting an opportunity for time freedom and financial independence.

21. Defendants emphasize recruitment over product sales and stress the importance of recruiting new participants into the Vemma program. Defendants direct new and prospective Affiliates to follow a simple "system" in order to be successful, which generally consists of the following four steps.

22. First, the individual should become an Affiliate by purchasing an "Affiliate Pack," which costs approximately $500 or $600 and which contains a mixture of various
Vemma Products, audio and video recordings, print materials, and Vemma branded items. Defendants tell consumers:

a. [Y]ou don't have to buy an affiliate but you have to buy an affiliate pack.

b. Anyone can join- it's FREE to signup! But if you're interested in a life-changing opportunity and ready to build a business to earn immediate commission for your efforts, we recommend starting out by choosing an Affiliate Pack. The Affiliate Pack maximizes your opportunity and gives you the tools and products to start sharing Vemma with others.

23. Defendants frequently describe the Affiliate Pack as the Affiliate's initial investment or start-up cost. For example, Vemma states:
If you are ready to achieve your financial dreams without any barriers, now is the perfect time to join Vemma as an Affiliate. Simply choose an Affiliate Pack to maximize your opportunity so you can start earning immediate income. You'll see how this tiny investment in your business is pennies compared to the huge earning potential this opportunity can afford you.

24. Second, the Affiliate should sign up for monthly "auto-delivery" in an amount sufficient to maintain eligibility for bonuses, which is approximately $150 per month. Auto-delivery automatically charges the Affiliate on a set periodic basis for a standing product purchase-order. Defendants refer to auto-delivery as an expense to participate in the business. In Defendant Boreyko's words:
[A]fter you've done your affiliate pack, you need to get on an auto-delivery order. Do the two -- what I would do is I would get four of those variety packs, two cases, 120 points. That is like your trump card. That makes sure that you're qualified. And here's the thing, yes, you can qualify with customers, but you know what, sometimes customers don't order and they don't tell you they don't order, and all of a sudden you're like, hey, I didn't get- I wasn't qualified.

25. Third, the Affiliate should find others who "see what [they] see" and enroll them as Affiliates. Defendant Boreyko states:
And I know with this move [] to affiliate marketing and a lot of people have been talking about, hey, customers, that's great. I mean, but we're mining for gold, and we're looking for those[] entrepreneurs. But when you find a silver nugget, you don't throw it away. You say, hey, that's great, that's a byproduct of our business. And [] so, those customers are like silver ... but the affiliates, man, they are like gold and you got to treat them like gold. And, so, you're going to find people that are into health make great customers. You're going to find these nuggets of gold, these people that are entrepreneurial, they're people that have this desire to [] get out of their job, pay off their debt, have [] leverage in their life, time freedom, money freedom. And-- and that is the people that we're looking for.

26. Other company materials reiterate this focus on recruiting like-minded individuals into the program:

1. When you believe in this opportunity and help others do the same, you can tum this business into career income, and you should know that it's happening for people just like you.

2. And when you find someone who sees what you and I see, who are excited about what this can do for their life, those are the people you got to focus on.

27. Fourth, the Affiliate should teach those recruits to "duplicate" this process (i.e., purchase an Mfiliate Pack, get on a qualifying monthly auto-delivery order, recruit others, and teach them to repeat). Defendants further stress the importance of duplication by telling new Affiliates:

a. It' s not what you can do; it's what you can model and replicate so hundreds, thousands, or even tens of thousands of people can do. You arc used to producing 100 percent of the results by your efforts. The beauty of this model is you can earn 1 percent from 100 people's efforts if not 1 percent from 1,000, 10,000, or more . .. To go from you to a few, to hundreds, to tens of thousands, you need a simple, duplicatable system that anyone with little to no skills can use anywhere at any time. The leadership in Vemma has that system, just don't get in the way of it.

[Y]ou want the system to do all the work. Not only will it then work for you, it will work for anyone, and that's when the magic of duplication can kick in and send your financial potential into the stratosphere. As you'll soon see, your Vemma business is easy to set in motion and easy to duplicate. Keeping the business simple attracts others to your network. Presenting a plan that can be duplicated encourages others to make their dreams a reality!

28. While slight variations o f this recommended system exist, the focus is consistently on recruitment. As Defendant Boreyko stated during a company event:

(H]ere's our simple plan. Number one, buy an affiliate pack. Number two, find three people that see what you see in this business in your first week. Remember, you got that 24-second shot clock in a basketball game. That's what brings excitement. We got this thing called a frenzy bonus and a double frenzy bonus, that all that does is bring excitement to your business here. So, find three people that see what you see in this business. You might find three or four or five customers, but find three [A]fflliates and get them to buy an [A]fflliate pack. And guess what, you're going to make approximately 700 bucks. Wow, you got your money back for your 0 business, you're fired up, and you got three great people that have raised their hands saying I want significant change financially in my life. (Cheers and applause.)
Third thing, third thing: Get car qualified. If I'm going to give you 400 bucks a month to go get yourself a car so you can feel good, and here's what's great about the car is it actually helps your business because people look at you and they go, you're driving that? What, maybe I should sit down with you... So, you get yourself in a car and then you help five people get in a car, you're making $50,000 approximately in residual income. And that is our plan. That's it. (Cheers and applause.) And the more you do it, the more you get. But here's the ... here's the trick. The more you don't do it, the less you get.

29. Conversely, Defendants provide no guidance on where to market or sell Vemma Products. Instead, Defendants teach Affiliates to give away the products as . samples and to concentrate their efforts on recruiting new participants.

30. To help Affiliates recruit new Vemma participants, Defendants provide numerous tools and training materials. For example, Vemma' s websites, including www.vemma.com, www.vemmanews.com, www.achieve.vemma.com, and www.vemmavideos.com, provide videos, live and pre-recorded calls, and print materials, many of which Defendants direct Affiliates to show at their recruitment meetings or home events. One such video proclaims that "[i]t's not uncommon for people to begin earning from their Vemma opportunity in the first seven to thirty

31. Vemma additionally provides each Affiliate with his or her own e- commerce website to market Vemma's program. Vemma provides Affiliates with a website template that includes a list of videos the Affiliate may choose to display on his or her website. Many of those videos contain misrepresentations regarding the income potential of Vemma.

32. Affiliates have also created training and promotional materials related to Vemma. For example, Defendant Alkazin's website, wwv.,r.myroadmaptosuccess.com, provides access to multiple training presentations, including a purchasable audio CD and training workbook titled "Roadmap to Success - A Working Plan for Creating Wealth Through the Vemma Opportunity" (the "Roadmap"). The Roadmap, which has gone through at least three iterations since 2009, describes Defendant Alkazin's eight-step system for building a Vemma business. Vemma requires company approval prior to the distribution of materials by Affiliates. In addition, Vemma may formally integrate Affiliate materials into its own resources. In 2014, for example, Vemma incorporated the Alkazin Roadmap into an official training program called ''Affiliate Action Plan: 8 Steps To Your Success."

Defendants' Income Claims
33 . Defendants assert that consumers can earn significant income and rewards though Vemma, and that Affiliates' income potential is limited only by their own efforts. Defendant Boreyko has repeatedly made income claims during Vemma presentations:

We have a game plan to get you earning $500, $5,000, or even $50,000 per month! And whether you tell three or four (people] and enjoy free product or a light bulb comes on and you get how powerful this concept is, when you meet some of the people that have partnered up with us and have begun generating an extra $500, $5,000, even $50,000 or more per month part- time. You know, we have young people doing enough just to enjoy some free product and we have some making an extra $500 a month, we have some making an extra $500 a week, and some young people really get serious about this business model and they've developed a residual income of$5,000 a month or even $5:000 a week. In fact, I've got a 26- year-old, get a load of this, that will earn $1 million this year. I'd like to lay out a game plan that can give you the opportunity to get profitable fast and be driving a new BMW within the next 90 days.
So, in fact, we' ve got people making $1 ,000, $1,500, $2,000 in their very first month. Now, let's get you in that new BMW.

Step number two, now just help one person on each side of your business duplicate the success that you're having and create about $5,000 in volume, bam, you' re car qualified.

Step number three, just help five people on your two teams get a car and you're earning about $50,000 a year residual income part-time, and it just keeps growing from there.

You see, I'm projected, on these referral bonuses, to pay out bonuses totaling $50 million this year alone.
I don't care if you want to make [$]500 [] a month or $5,000 a month. I don't care what you want to make. You get to decide that. And that is the opportunity here ... Think of the fact that two to four years invested into this business, you have a great chance of setting yourself up financially for potentially the rest of your life. This next couple, you guys are going to absolutely love this next couple. I had the privilege to pay this couple and their children in one month, not too many months ago, 900- $963,000, in one month, ladies and gentlemen, our star pinnacle leaders Tom and Bethany Alkazin.

34. Defendant Boreyko also interviews Vemma Affiliates about their purported success and presents their testimonials in videos that are posted to the company's websites, YouTube channels, and social media sites. Throughout these testimonials, Affiliates attest to how easily and quickly they were able to earn lucrative pay by
building their downlines . Many of these videos feature young adults who talk about having financial wealth without a college degree or the confines of a 9-to-5 job, or about driving the luxury Mercedes-Benz or BMW that they received through Vemma:

Boreyko: [T]ell me how that feels when you are driving this [new BMW] and you're taking your friends somewhere . . . [W]hat kind of things are you hearing?

Affiliate 1: Well, they see that it's doable and, you know, a lot of people[] don't understand ... kids at a young age making[] these types of money, I mean, $2,000 a month.

Boreyko: And you made $5,000 last month.

Affiliate 1: I made $5,000 last month, and it's absolutely insane, you know, to think about what we can do and what we can change with this entire thing. And Owe're taking over the entire country. I mean, this guy is the first person on my left leg, so I have over 650 people in my business in just five months.

Boreyko: That is absolutely incredible. Now, what do your friends say when they get behind the wheel, and you've been in this four and a half months, driving a new BMW, having me pay for it, which I love to do. Is this something that helps people's believability? Does it help to move your business forward?

Affiliate 2: Yeah.
***
Boreyko: All right. So, how does it feel to be 19 years old, making $5,000 a month promoting a healthy energy drink? And are you having fun doing this?

Affiliate 2: Absolutely ... we're hanging out with our friends anyway and helping them[] and that's special. And making money while you're doing it, it's killing two birds with one stone.

***

Boreyko: [G]ive us some words of wisdom. You get in the business five months ago; you blow this thing up. Tell me, you know, how long did it take you to cycle for the first time and then what did you do month two, month three, month four, month five.

Affiliate 1: Yeah, well, mainly, you know, just duplicated the system ... I saw high schooler’s making $1,000 a week, and that ... blew my mind .. . And I have a [guy who is] 17 years old [who] got [] Diamond in 21 days . . . So, company-paid car. He's made over, you know, five grand in the past two and a half months.

***

Boreyko: We got, you know, hundreds and hundreds of the young kids at this - at this meeting here in North Carolina, and all they're talking about is becoming millionaires ... And for some kids, it's like the first time-- I think everybody always dreamt they'd want to become a millionaire, but really for a lot of these kids, it's the first time they've actually had a shot at becoming a millionaire in a business like this.

35. Defendant Alkazin has likewise made income claims when presenting the Vemrna opportunity: It's not uncommon for us to see people earning anywhere from $500, $1,000, $2,000, even $3,000 in their first four to eight weeks in the business.
[H]ow well does this work? We have people earning $100 to $200 per week cycle bonus income. We have some earning $300 to $500 per week. We have some earning $1,000 to $3,000 a week. We have some earning, five, ten, fifteen. Imagine this, some even more than $20,000 on a weekly basis. Now, if we're doing this well after this short amount of time, can you imagine what the next three to five years holds in store?

36. Defendant Alkazin also directs his downlines to make income claims. For example, his Roadmap provides Affiliates with scripts to follow when attempting to recruit new participants, such as:
John, if I could show you how to invest $120 per month in your family's health and turn that into $1000 to $3000 per month, part time, what would you say?

37. Defendants and their Affiliates make other claims regarding the high income potential purportedly associated with Vemrna in various videos and print materials:

Do you want a few hundred dollars a month on the side? Do you want to make a six-figure income? A million? All ofthis is possible but you have to know where you want to go to determine what, and how much you have to do.
Do you want to make an extra $500-$1000 in order to quit your part time job, or do you want to make six figures to gain the time and financial freedom that you have always dreamed of? Both are achievable, and both have been done before, you just need to ask yourself . .. how big do you want to dream?

c. And guess what, we even have a 26-year-old guy ... earning over $1 million a year.

1. Here's the thing, guys. When I first got in this business, my own roommate ... who's now earning over $12,000 a month in Vemma, told me no. So, when your friends don't want to do it, don't get discouraged, guys. They will come around. When they start seeing you make money, when they see you getting free BMWs, guys, they will eventually come around.

2. You don't want to live life with no money. You want to have so much money it doesn't even matter. That's why people do Vemma, to have enough money to where it doesn't even matter anymore, guys.

3. [T]he days of the week shouldn't even matter to you, guys. Why does the day of the week even matter? The sun comes up, goes down, we make money while we're asleep. That's how Vemma works. You're paid 24 hours a day, seven days a week no matter what you are doing.

4. Here's the thing: in the last two weeks, I have earned $59,500.

38. In addition, during company events and conventions, Vemma presents the
select few top earners with large checks representing their yearly or lifetime earnings.

39. While Defendants sometimes attempt to provide disclaimers when making
these and other income claims, their attempts are inadequate. V emma typically dilutes purported disclaimers, such as "results may vary," with statements implying that negative results are due to the inadequate efforts of the Affiliate.

40. Defendants consistently lead consumers to believe that ifthey simply work hard, they can and will earn substantial sums. For instance, during a presentation, Boreyko stated:
This is a product that you could earn seven figures, and I'm not making any kind of income claims, because your results may vary; it's happened to other people, so why shouldn't it happen to you? I mean, results aren't typical; I hope not typical.

41. One high-ranking Vemma Affiliate even tells potential recruits:
The only way you fail in this is by quitting or doing nothing. That's it. If you do something and don't quit, you succeed every time, no matter where you come from, no matter what your educational level is.

42. In addition, Vemma has published annual disclosure statements since 2012. For example, the 2013 U.S. Disclosure Statement shows that in 2013, more than 93 percent of Affiliates earned less than $6,169; more than 87 percent earned less than $3,674; more than 40 percent earned less than $939; and less than 0.62 percent earned $92,181 or more.

43. While the figures contained in the company's disclosure statements are somewhat revealing, they nonetheless do not show the whole picture and are misleading. Among other things, the disclosure statements only take into account "active" Affiliates who have met certain minimum purchase thresholds and omit participants who fared worse.

44. In contrast to Defendants' numerous claims regarding profitability and the unlimited income potential associated with Vemma, the vast majority of Affiliates make no money. Vemma's compensation plan, further discussed below, and its corresponding marketing activities dictate that at any particular time, the majority of Affiliates lose money.

Vemma's Compensation Plan

45. Vemma's compensation plan is based on a binary system, and Affiliates can earn financial and other rewards for building two "downlines" - a "left team" and a "right team" - of individuals who enroll with Vemma as Affiliates or customers.

46. There are several levels of Affiliates, and Affiliates' rank and bonus eligibility is generally determined by the number of "points" they earn during a specified period. Points are earned through product purchases.

47. To become an Affiliate, a consumer must either purchase an Affiliate Pack of Vemma Products and tools for approximately $500 or $600, or personally enroll a customer or Affiliate. In practice, Defendants advise consumers to buy the $500 or $600 Affiliate Pack, which they characterize as the Affiliate's initial investment.

48. After becoming an Affiliate, the individual must maintain a "qualified" status to be eligible for financial compensation and other rewards. This means the Affiliate must have: (1) a minimum of 120 points in "personal volume" each month; and (2) at least one "active" customer or Affiliate on each of the Affiliate's left and right teams.
49. To achieve 120 personal volume points in a month, Affiliates can personally purchase products worth that same number in "qualifying volume" points or "QV" (e.g., a 2-pack of Vemma Health at $171 for 120 QV), have double that (i.e., 240 QV) purchased by their personally enrolled customers, or some combination of both.

50. Active customers or Affiliates must have a minimum of 60 personal volume points in a month. They can do this by personally purchasing products worth 60 QV that month (e.g. , a 1-pack of Vemma Health at $74), having double that purchased by their personally enrolled customers, or some combination o f both. In some cases, the requirements for active status are doubled and match the requirements for qualified status.

51 . As stated above, Vemma urges Affiliates to purchase products through a personal monthly auto-delivery order of 120 QV to ensure uninterrupted qualification for bonuses.

52. Vemma's compensation plan includes many confusing and convoluted rules and requirements, and some bonuses or rewards impose additional restrictions or limitations.

53 . Vemma states that its compensation plan generally offers two types o f financial compensation: (a) immediate income and (b) long-term or "residual" income.

Immediate Income

54. Affiliates may receive a New Customer Bonus ranging from $5 to $100 on the first purchase made by a new customer or Affiliate, so long as the Affiliate personally enrolled them.

55.· Affiliates who purchased an Affiliate Pack may earn Frenzy or Double
Frenzy Bonuses. Frenzy Bonuses are paid to qualified Affiliates who recruit three people who purchase at least 120 QV of Vemma Products within the same week they enroll in Vemma. Double Frenzy Bonuses pay higher rewards ifeach ofthose three recruits purchases an Affiliate Pack (which signifies enrollment as an Affiliate) and signs up for a monthly auto-delivery order worth at least 120 QV. An Affiliate may earn up to 19 $700 through the New Customer and Double Frenzy bonuses combined. Defendants tout this as the way for Affiliates to recover the cost of their initial investments.

Long-term or Residual Income

56. Vemma describes residual income as "the art of earning income after the initial work has been done."

57. Vemma states that the "most powerful" bonus, and the pathway to residual income, is its Cycle Commission. At the end of each week, Affiliates may earn approximately $20 each time they "cycle," or accumulate 360 QV points on one team and
180 QV points on the other. For example, an Affiliate cycles one time, and earns roughly $20, where he or she has three 2-pack Vemma Health purchases on the left team (totaling $444) and three 1-pack Vemma Health purchases on the right team (totaling $222, for a combined total of $666 in purchases).

Other Rewards

58. Vemma offers other bonuses that are connected to the Affiliate's number of cycles. Rank Advancement Awards are one-time bonuses paid when an Affiliate achieves a new "rank." There are at least eighteen ranks within the compensation plan ranging from Bronze to Legend, based upon the number of cycles the Affiliate accrues during a four-week rank advancement period or "RAP." For example, if the Affiliate reaches the rank of Silver (five cycles- which is equivalent to approximately $3 ,330 in Vemrna Health 2-pack purchases- per RAP) and maintains that rank for at least two consecutive RAPs, the Affiliate receives $100. Affiliates may receive up to $1 million if they reach the highest rank of Legend (20,000 cycles - which is equivalent to 20 approximately $13.32 million in Vemma Health 2-pack purchases- per RAP) and maintain that rank for at least four consecutive RAPs.

59. Other bonuses tied to the Affiliate's number o f cycles include the Premier Club Bonus, Balanced Team Bonus, Affiliate Pack Flag, Matching Commission, Second Tier Matching Commission, and Global Bonus Pool.

60. Under the Vemma Loyalty Program, Affiliates can earn a free case of product (in a maximum amount of 120 QV or the lowest order placed) if they purchase a minimum of 60 QV per month for six consecutive months. The free product does not constitute points for purposes of bonus determination.

61. Affiliates do not primarily earn bonuses for actual sales of Vemma Products. Instead, Vemma rewards Affiliates for personally purchasing Vemma Products to maintain bonus eligibility, and for recruiting others who likewise purchase Vemma Products to maintain bonus eligibility. Overall, the key determinate of an Affiliate's income, and thus the activity incentivized by the compensation plan, is the recruitment of Affiliates into the Affiliate's down line teams, who then recruit other Affiliates, and so on.

62. In fact, the likelihood of Affiliates earning profits on retail sales is minimal. While Vemma states that Affiliates may keep profits they earn by selling Vemma Products, Vemma offers no meaningful discounts or incentives to encourage such behavior. The company also severely restricts Affiliates from selling Vemma Products, expressly prohibiting sales at business or retail outlets or offices, flea markets, swap meets, garage sales, home shopping networks, and online stores or auction sites, including eBay and Craigslist.

63. In sum, unlike legitimate multilevel marketing businesses, Defendants reward Affiliates for recruiting and for purchasing products to maintain bonus eligibility rather than for selling products to ultimate-user consumers.

VIOLATIONS OF SECTION 5 OF THE FTC ACT

64. Section 5(a) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(a), prohibits "unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce."

65 . Misrepresentations or deceptive omissions o f material fact constitute deceptive acts or practices prohibited by Section 5(a) of the FTC Act. COUNT I

Illegal Pyramid
66. As alleged above, Defendants promote participation in Vemma, which has a compensation program based primarily on providing payments to participants for the recruitment of new participants, not on the retail sale of products or services, thereby resulting in a substantial percentage of participants losing money.
67. Defendants' promotion of this type of scheme, often referred to as a pyramid scheme, constitutes a deceptive act or practice in violation of Section 5(a) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C.§ 45(a).

COUNT II
Income Claims
68. In numerous instances in connection with the advertising, marketing, promotion, offering for sale, or sale of the right to participate in the Vemma program,
Defendants have represented, directly or indirectly, expressly or by implication, that consumers who become Vemma Affiliates are likely to earn substantial income.

69. In truth and in fact, in numerous instances in which Defendants have made the representations set forth in Paragraph 68 of this Complaint, consumers who become Vemma Affiliates are not likely to earn substantial income.

70. Therefore, Defendants' representations are false or misleading and constitute a deceptive act or practice in violation of Section S(a) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(a).

COUNT III
Failure to Disclose
71. In numerous instances in connection with the advertising, marketing, promotion, offering for sale, or sale of the right to participate in the Vemma program, Defendants have represented, directly or indirectly, expressly or by implication, that individuals have earned substantial income from participation in the Vemma program, and that any consumer who becomes a Vemma Affiliate has the ability to earn substantial income.

72. In numerous instances in which Defendants have made the representation set forth in Paragraph 71 of this Complaint, Defendants have failed to disclose, or disclose adequately, that Vemma's structure ensures that most consumers who become Vemma Affiliates will not earn substantial income.

73. This additional information would be material to consumers in deciding whether to participate in the Vemma program.

74. Defendants' failure to disclose, or to disclose adequately, the material information described in paragraph 72, in light of the representations made in paragraph 71, constitutes a deceptive act or practice in violation of Section S(a) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(a).

COUNT IV
Means and Instrumentalities
75. By furnishing Vemma Affiliates with promotional materials to be used in recruiting new participants that contain false and misleading representations, Defendants have provided the means and instrumentalities for the commission o f deceptive acts and practices.

76. Therefore, Defendants' practices as described in Paragraph 75 of this Complaint, constitute a deceptive act or practice in violation of Section 5(a) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(a).

COUNTY Relief Defendant
77. Relief Defendant Bethany Alkazin, has received, directly or indirectly, funds or other assets from Defendants that are traceable to funds obtained from Defendants' customers through the deceptive acts or practices described herein.

78. Relief Defendant is not a bona fide purchaser with legal and equitable title to Defendants' customers' funds, and Relief Defendant will be unjustly enriched if she is not required to disgorge the funds or the value of the benefit she received as a result of Defendants' deceptive acts or practices.

79. By reason of the foregoing, Relief Defendant holds funds and assets in constructive trust for the benefit of Defendants' customers.

CONSUMER INJURY
80. Consumers have suffered and will continue to suffer substantial injury as a result of Defendants' violations of the FTC Act. In addition, Defendants have been unjustly enriched as a result of their unlawful acts or practices. Absent injunctive relief by this Court, Defendants are likely to continue to injure consumers, reap unjust enrichment, and harm the public interest.

THIS COURT'S POWER TO GRANT RELIEF
81. Section 13(b) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 53(b), empowers this Court to grant injunctive and such other relief as the Court may deem appropriate to halt and redress violations of any provision of law enforced by the FTC. The Court, in the exercise of its equitable jurisdiction, may award ancillary relief, including rescission or reformation of contracts, restitution, the refund of monies paid, and the disgorgement of ill-gotten monies, to prevent and remedy any violation of any provision of law enforced by the FTC.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF
Wherefore, Plaintiff FTC, pursuant to Section 13(b) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. §
53(b) and the Court' s own equitable powers, requests that the Court:

A. Award Plaintiff such preliminary injunctive and ancillary relief as may be necessary to avert the likelihood of consumer injury during the pendency of this action and to preserve the possibility of effective relief, including but not limited to, temporary and preliminary injunctions, an order freezing assets, immediate access, and appointment of a receiver;

B. Enter a permanent injunction to prevent future violations of the FTC Act by Defendants ;

C. Award such relief as the Court finds necessary to redress injury to consumers resulting from Defendants' violations of the FTC Act, including but not limited to, rescission or reformation o f contracts, restitution, the refund of monies paid, and the disgorgement of ill-gotten monies;

D. Enter an order requiring Relief Defendant to disgorge all funds and assets, or the value of the benefit she received from the funds and assets, which are traceable to Defendants' deceptive acts or practices; and

E. Award Plaintiff the costs of bringing this action, as well as such other and additional relief as the Court may determine to be just and proper.

DATED this 17th day of August, 2015.

Respectfully submitted,
JONATHAN E. NUECHTERLEIN

General Counsel
ANGELE UE P. LINVILLE, Tex. Bar No. 24058793 JASON C. MOON, Tex. Bar No. 24001188
ANNE D. LEJEUNE, Tex. Bar No. 24054286
EMILY B. ROBINSON, Tex. Bar No. 24046737 Federal Trade Commission

1999 Bryan Street, Suite 2150
Dallas, Texas 75201

(214) 979-9381; alinville@ftc.gov (Linville) (214) 979-9378; jmoon@ftc.gov (Moon)
(214) 979-9371; alejeune@ftc.gov (LeJeune) (214) 979-9386; erobinson@ftc.gov (Robinson) (214