FTC versus Innovative Marketing et al - developments

As we know, Jain's legal counsel have applied for leave to withdraw as his attorneys of record.  They have not been given permission to withdraw yet, and the deadline for Jain to respond to the FTC's renewed motion for sanctions was nigh, therefore Jain's counsel has filed a document in opposition to the renewed motion.

Jain's counsel claims that:

"Mr. Jain is not acting in bad faith, but on a well-justified fear that the FTC will attempt to circumvent and undermine his valid Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination".

and

"Regarding deterrence, Mr. Jain is not guilty of a pattern of contumacious behavior; indeed, through counsel, he otherwise has actively participated in this case for almost one year."

and

"Finally, the FTC does not even address the possibility of lesser sanctions against Mr. Jain."

My immediate reaction, on reading the motion, was “come on, who are they trying to fool?”. Let's not forget, when reading the above, that Jain's legal counsel claim in their motion for leave to withdraw that they have NEVER had direct contact with Jain, and that they have had no indirect contact with him for more than 10 months, and that they have no idea where he is.  Such silence does not equate to 'active' participation in my world.

Not surprisingly, the FTC's response has been swift and states, in part:

"Counsel’s description of Jain’s conduct bears no resemblance to the facts of this case. Jain – a fugitive for nearly a year now – has been toying with this Court and the FTC from the outset of this case. Jain has ignored the Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction entered by this Court, and completely disregarded this Court’s most recent command that he appear for deposition."

and

"Jain has also wasted this Court’s time with a barrage of frivolous motions, which were designed solely to bog down this litigation and delay the FTC’s efforts to obtain redress on behalf of the millions of consumers Jain and his co-defendants have defrauded. Having succeeded in delaying this case for as long as possible, Jain has now disappeared, and left his lawyers behind to craft excuses for his egregious conduct."

It makes you wonder whether Jain's lawyers have received, or are going to receive, payment for their hard work over the past year, doesn't it.  Here's hoping they received plenty of $$ in advance.

Published Wed, Nov 18 2009 7:58 by sandi
Filed under: ,

Comments

# re: FTC versus Innovative Marketing et al - developments

Wednesday, November 18, 2009 3:05 AM by Conrad Longmore

They've had no contact.. but they know exactly what Jain is thinking? Methinks it's time to slap some lawyers in jail for contempt.

# re: FTC versus Innovative Marketing et al - developments

Saturday, December 05, 2009 7:20 PM by Anonymous

Which, if any of the defendants are still even in America? And is the reason that the FTC is releasing comments about Jain and not the other defendants that Jain was the only one with a lawyer?

# re: FTC versus Innovative Marketing et al - developments

Saturday, December 05, 2009 7:49 PM by sandi

@ "Anonymous".

Firstly, Jain is NOT "the only one with a lawyer".  On the contrary, it is only Innovative Marketing itself, and Daniel Sundin, who have not hired lawyers.  Everybody else has legal representation.

Jain's lawyers have filed a motion asking to be removed from the court record (that is, they have applied for permission to stop being his lawyers) but that motion has NOT been approved or denied.  His laywers want out because, they claim, they have never had direct contact with the guy, and have had no indirect contact since earlier this year.

Secondly, the FTC is NOT "releasing comments about Jain".  The information and quotes in this entry come from court documents filed with the court that have been made available to the public.

Sandi