Case 8:20-cv-01431-JLS-KES Document 1 Filed 08/04/20 Page 1 of 19 Page ID #:1
`
`
`
`KATHERINE E. JOHNSON, pro hac vice pending
`kjohnson3@ftc.gov
`KRISTY M. TILLMAN, pro hac vice pending
`ktillman@ftc.gov
`Federal Trade Commission
`600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, CC-9528
`Washington, DC 20580
`(202) 326-2185 (Johnson); (202) 326-3025 (Tillman)
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
`Local Counsel
`DELILAH VINZON
`Cal. Bar No. 222681; dvinzon@ftc.gov
`Federal Trade Commission
`10990 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 400
`Los Angeles, CA 90024
`Tel: (310) 824-4300; Fax: (310) 824-4380
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`
`Case No.
`
`
`COMPLAINT FOR PERMANENT
`INJUNCTION AND OTHER
`EQUITABLE RELIEF
`
`
`FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`)
`QYK BRANDS LLC d/b/a Glowyy,
`)
`
`)
`DRJSNATURAL LLC,
`)
`
`)
`RAKESH TAMMABATTULA,
`)
`individually and as an officer of QYK
`)
`BRANDS LLC, and
`)
`
`)
`JACQUELINE THAO NGUYEN,
`)
`individually and as an officer of QYK
`)
`BRANDS LLC and DRJSNATURAL LLC
`)
`
` Defendants.
`)
`
` 1
` 2
` 3
` 4
` 5
` 6
` 7
` 8
` 9
` 10
` 11
` 12
` 13
` 14
` 15
` 16
` 17
` 18
` 19
` 20
` 21
` 22
` 23
` 24
` 25
` 26
` 27
` 28
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-01431-JLS-KES Document 1 Filed 08/04/20 Page 2 of 19 Page ID #:2
`
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff, the Federal trade Commission (“FTC”) for its Complaint alleges:
`The FTC brings this action under Sections 13(b) and 19 of the Federal
`1.
`Trade Commission Act (“FTC Act”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 53(b) and 57b, and the FTC’s
`Trade Regulation Rule Concerning the Sale of Mail, Internet, or Telephone Order
`Merchandise (“MITOR” or the “Rule”), 16 C.F.R. Part 435, to obtain temporary,
`preliminary, and permanent injunctive relief, rescission or reformation of contracts,
`restitution, the refund of monies paid, disgorgement of ill-gotten monies, and other
`equitable relief for Defendants’ acts or practices in violation of Sections 5(a) and
`12 of the FTC act, 15 U.S.C. §45 (a) and 52, and in violation of MITOR, 16 C.F.R.
`Part 435.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
`2.
`§§ 1331, 1337(a) and 1345.
`Venue is proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) (1-2), and
`3.
`15 U.S.C. § 53(b).
`
`PLAINTIFF
`The FTC is an independent agency of the United States Government
`4.
`created by statute. 15 U.S.C. §§ 41-58. The FTC enforces Section 5 of the FTC
`Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(a), which prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or
`affecting commerce. The FTC also enforces MITOR, which requires mail,
`Internet, or telephone-based sellers to have a reasonable basis for advertised
`shipment times, and, when sellers cannot meet promised shipment times or ship
`within 30 days, to provide buyers with the option to consent to a delay in shipment
`or to cancel an order and receive a prompt refund, and to deem an order cancelled
`and make a prompt refund to buyers under certain circumstances.
`The FTC is authorized to initiate federal district court proceedings, by
`5.
`its own attorneys, to enjoin violations of the FTC Act and MITOR, and to secure
`such equitable relief as may be appropriate in each case, including rescission or
`
`-2-
`
` 1
` 2
` 3
` 4
` 5
` 6
` 7
` 8
` 9
` 10
` 11
` 12
` 13
` 14
` 15
` 16
` 17
` 18
` 19
` 20
` 21
` 22
` 23
` 24
` 25
` 26
` 27
` 28
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-01431-JLS-KES Document 1 Filed 08/04/20 Page 3 of 19 Page ID #:3
`
`
`
`reformation of contracts, restitution, the refund of monies paid, and the
`disgorgement of ill-gotten monies. 15 U.S.C. §§ 53(b), 57b, and 16 C.F.R. Part
`435.
`
`DEFENDANTS
`Defendant QYK Brands LLC (“QYK” or “Glowyy”) is a California
`6.
`Limited Liability Company, with its principal place of business located at 9
`MacArthur Place, # 302, Santa Ana, California. QYK does business as Glowyy
`through the website glowwy.com and owns the trademark for Dr. J’s Natural.
`QYK 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, QYK has advertised, marketed, or sold merchandise to consumers
`throughout the United States.
`DRJSNATURAL LLC (“Dr. J’s Natural”) is a California Limited
`7.
`Liability Company, with its principal place of business located at 10517 Garden
`Grove Boulevard, Garden Grove, California.
`Defendant Rakesh Tammabattula (“Tammabattula”) is the Chief
`8.
`Executive Officer of QYK. At all times material to this Complaint, acting alone or
`in concert with others, Tammabattula has formulated, directed, controlled, had the
`authority to control, or participated in the acts and practices of QYK, including the
`acts and practices set forth in this Complaint. Defendant Tammabattula resides in
`this District and, in connection with the matters alleged herein, transacts or has
`transacted business in this District and throughout the United States.
`Defendant Jacqueline Thao Nguyen, who works under the moniker
`9.
`“Dr. J,” is married to Rakesh Tammabattula, and is the Chief Operating Officer of
`QYK, and the founder and Chief Executive Officer of Dr. J’s Natural. At all times
`material to this Complaint, acting alone or in concert with others, Dr. J has
`formulated, directed, controlled, had the authority to control, or participated in the
`acts and practices of QYK and Dr. J’s Natural, including the acts and practices set
`
`-3-
`
` 1
` 2
` 3
` 4
` 5
` 6
` 7
` 8
` 9
` 10
` 11
` 12
` 13
` 14
` 15
` 16
` 17
` 18
` 19
` 20
` 21
` 22
` 23
` 24
` 25
` 26
` 27
` 28
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-01431-JLS-KES Document 1 Filed 08/04/20 Page 4 of 19 Page ID #:4
`
`
`
`forth in this Complaint. Defendant Dr. J resides in this District and, in connection
`with the matters alleged herein, transacts or has transacted business in this District
`and throughout the United States.
`COMMERCE
`10. 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 ACTIVITIES
`11. Tammabattula and Dr. J, through QYK (collectively, the “QYK
`Defendants”) own multiple brands and companies that sell skin care, health,
`beauty, personal care, and wellness products. The QYK Defendants promote and
`sell products on qyk.us, qyksonic.com, glowyy.com, and drjsnatural.com.
`12. Beginning on or around March 12, 2020, the QYK Defendants offered
`Dr. J’s Natural (and other branded) hand sanitizer through the website
`glowyy.com. The QYK Defendants market four sizes of Dr. J’s Natural hand
`sanitizer: a 3.3 oz bottle for $5.99; a 4.0 oz bottle for $5.99; a 10 oz bottle for
`$9.99; and a 16 oz bottle for $12.99. The QYK Defendants also offer Personal
`Protective Equipment (such as face masks and shields), surface wipes, and
`disinfectants.
`
`The QYK Defendants’ Shipment Claims
`13. During the early weeks of the pandemic quarantine in the United
`States, obtaining hand sanitizer as quickly as possible was paramount for many
`consumers; this high demand made products difficult to find.
`In order to capitalize on this demand, beginning in early March 2020,
`14.
`the QYK Defendants started advertising they had hand sanitizer “In Stock” and
`“Ships Today.”
`
`-4-
`
` 1
` 2
` 3
` 4
` 5
` 6
` 7
` 8
` 9
` 10
` 11
` 12
` 13
` 14
` 15
` 16
` 17
` 18
` 19
` 20
` 21
` 22
` 23
` 24
` 25
` 26
` 27
` 28
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-01431-JLS-KES Document 1 Filed 08/04/20 Page 5 of 19 Page ID #:5
`
`
`
`15. The QYK Defendants disseminated these advertisements on
`Instagram and in targeted ads through GQ.com, for example, and in response to
`web searches for hand sanitizer.
`16. For example, the following appeared in response to a Google search
`on or about March 12, 2020:
`
`17. The QYK Defendants’ promises that hand sanitizer “Ships Today”
`were false.
`18. For example, one consumer ordered from glowyy.com on March 12,
`2020 following a Google search for hand sanitizer, which led to an advertisement
`from the QYK Defendants representing that glowyy.com had “Hand Sanitizers in
`Stock” and that the order would ship the same day it was purchased.
`19. Despite this promise, the consumer’s order did not ship until April 12,
`2020. Moreover, when the consumer finally received her order on April 16, 2020,
`the sanitizer she received was a different brand and smaller size than she had
`ordered.
`20. Beginning in April through May 2020, the QYK Defendants’ website
`stated that shipment of hand sanitizer orders would be within seven (7) days. For
`example, on April 13, 2020, glowyy.com stated that customers should expect
`processing times of five to seven (5 to 7) days but indicated that orders would ship
`as soon as they were processed. Similarly, on April 19, 2020, glowwy.com stated
`that orders of hand sanitizer placed that day would ship by April 22, i.e. within
`
`-5-
`
` 1
` 2
` 3
` 4
` 5
` 6
` 7
` 8
` 9
` 10
` 11
` 12
` 13
` 14
` 15
` 16
` 17
` 18
` 19
` 20
` 21
` 22
` 23
` 24
` 25
` 26
` 27
` 28
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-01431-JLS-KES Document 1 Filed 08/04/20 Page 6 of 19 Page ID #:6
`
`
`
`three (3) days. And on May 15, glowyy.com stated that the processing time for
`hand sanitizer was three to seven (3 to 7) days. The following screenshots are
`from April 13, 19, and May 15, 2020, respectively:
`a. Glowyy Outbreak Essentials webpage dated April 13, 2020:
`
`
`b. Glowyy 10 oz Hand Sanitizer Gel webpage dated April 19, 2020:
`
`
`
`-6-
`
` 1
` 2
` 3
` 4
` 5
` 6
` 7
` 8
` 9
` 10
` 11
` 12
` 13
` 14
` 15
` 16
` 17
` 18
` 19
` 20
` 21
` 22
` 23
` 24
` 25
` 26
` 27
` 28
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-01431-JLS-KES Document 1 Filed 08/04/20 Page 7 of 19 Page ID #:7
`
`
`
`c. Glowyy Advanced Formula Hand Sanitizer webpage dated May 15, 2020:
`
`
`
`21. However, while the above advertisements were available, consumers
`still reported receiving online ads stating that orders would be shipped in less time.
`For example, one consumer reports receiving an online advertisement promising a
`one to two (1 to 2) day shipment time on April 19, 2020.
`22. The QYK Defendants’ promises of shipment times of seven days or
`less were false. In numerous instances, the QYK Defendants generated a United
`States Postal Services (“USPS”) shipping label and tracking number within one
`day, but waited weeks or months to deliver the ordered products to the post office
`for shipping.
`23. For example, a consumer placed an order for eight (8) bottles of hand
`sanitizer on April 5, 2020. She received an email confirmation from Glowyy that
`same day which included a tracking number, and stated, “Your order is on the
`way.”
`
`-7-
`
` 1
` 2
` 3
` 4
` 5
` 6
` 7
` 8
` 9
` 10
` 11
` 12
` 13
` 14
` 15
` 16
` 17
` 18
` 19
` 20
` 21
` 22
` 23
` 24
` 25
` 26
` 27
` 28
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-01431-JLS-KES Document 1 Filed 08/04/20 Page 8 of 19 Page ID #:8
`
`
`
`24. Despite ongoing inquiries and communications from the consumer,
`the QYK Defendants had not shipped the order by May 5, 2020, when she asked
`Glowyy to cancel the order and issue a refund. Glowyy failed to provide a refund.
`25. For hand sanitizer purchased between approximately mid-March and
`the end of April, numerous consumers reported their orders did not arrive at the
`mail carrier’s facility and ultimately were not shipped until weeks or months after
`their purchase.
`In numerous instances, the QYK Defendants did not ship one or more
`26.
`pieces of ordered merchandise, including hand sanitizer, within the timeframes
`represented in their advertisements and on their websites.
`In numerous instances, when the QYK Defendants failed to ship one
`27.
`or more pieces of ordered merchandise, including hand sanitizer, within stated time
`frames, the QYK Defendants did not offer consumers the opportunity to consent to
`a delay in shipping or to cancel their orders and receive refunds.
`The QYK Defendants’ Refusal to Issue Prompt Refunds and Cancel Orders
`28. Numerous consumers complained to QYK about shipping delays via
`emails to the company and on its social media web pages.
`In numerous instances, representatives from QYK told consumers
`29.
`ordered merchandise would ship soon, but did not offer the consumer the option of
`canceling and receiving a refund or of consenting to an indefinite delay, or any
`delay.
`30. After not receiving their merchandise, or after complaining and being
`informed of the delay, many consumers attempted to cancel their orders and
`requested refunds.
`In most instances, QYK refused, if it responded at all. Instead, the
`31.
`QYK Defendants informed consumers they could not issue a refund once the
`shipping label had been created.
`
`-8-
`
` 1
` 2
` 3
` 4
` 5
` 6
` 7
` 8
` 9
` 10
` 11
` 12
` 13
` 14
` 15
` 16
` 17
` 18
` 19
` 20
` 21
` 22
` 23
` 24
` 25
` 26
` 27
` 28
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-01431-JLS-KES Document 1 Filed 08/04/20 Page 9 of 19 Page ID #:9
`
`
`
`In some instances, the QYK Defendants informed consumers the only
`32.
`way to get a refund was to refuse delivery of the shipment, which would require
`the consumers to personally intercept the mail carrier at the time of delivery.
`33. The QYK Defendants shipped merchandise to consumers even after
`the consumers had cancelled the order and demanded a refund.
`In numerous instances, when the QYK Defendants failed to ship one
`34.
`or more pieces of ordered merchandise, including hand sanitizer, within stated time
`frames, and also failed to offer consumers the required opportunity to either
`consent to a delay in shipping or to cancel their orders and receive refunds, the
`QYK Defendants did not deem the orders cancelled and issue refunds.
`35. Dozens of consumers complained about these practices to QYK,
`Defendant Dr. J, online sites like Trustpilot.com, and the FTC, particularly during
`the initial months of the COVID-19 pandemic.
`The Individuals’ Knowledge
`In an April 2, 2020 YouTube video titled “Your Order Updates for Dr.
`36.
`J’s Natural Hand Sanitizer/Is Glowyy Legit?” Dr. J publicly addressed the
`complaints and concerns about the delays in shipping.
`37. She admitted some consumers had been waiting more than seven days
`due to “uncertainty on manufacturing side,” [sic] and that it had been “difficult to
`source the bottle or the pump.”
`38. On April 3, 2020, Tammabattula stated that QYK “saw the surge in
`searches for hand sanitizer [in early March]. That’s when we started ramping up
`our production.”
`39. A few days later Tammabattula publicly stated that the company only
`had enough raw ingredients for about two weeks’ worth of hand sanitizer, and
`“timelines for production have been extended six to eight weeks” compared to the
`typical two or three weeks.
`
`-9-
`
` 1
` 2
` 3
` 4
` 5
` 6
` 7
` 8
` 9
` 10
` 11
` 12
` 13
` 14
` 15
` 16
` 17
` 18
` 19
` 20
` 21
` 22
` 23
` 24
` 25
` 26
` 27
` 28
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-01431-JLS-KES Document 1 Filed 08/04/20 Page 10 of 19 Page ID #:10
`
`
`
`40. On April 9, 2020, Tammabattula reiterated there were not enough raw
`ingredients for hand sanitizer: “From the alcohol to the polymers that we use to
`gel the product to the plastic bottles that we use to package the product.”
`41. Despite these public acknowledgments, the QYK Defendants
`continued to make the same shipment timing claims on the glowyy.com website,
`specifically the QYK Defendants continued to advertise that the products were in
`stock and would ship within one to two (1 to 2) days, or three to seven (3 to 7)
`days, and continued to take orders with these shipment time claims throughout
`April, May, and June 2020.
`Dr. J’s Natural Defendants’ Deceptive COVID-19 Prevention Claims
`42. Dr. J’s Natural and Dr. J (collectively, “Dr. J’s Natural Defendants”)
`offer a product called “Basic Immune IGG” through their website, drjsnatural.com.
`The product is part of their “COVID Essentials” line. Dr. J’s Natural Defendants
`sell Basic Immune IGG for $89.
`43. Basic Immune IGG is the brand name used by the Dr. J’s Natural
`Defendants for a product developed by Entera Health, Inc. under the registered
`trademark Immunolin.
`44. Basic Immune IGG/Immunolin is a serum-derived bovine
`immunoglobulin concentrate.
`In English, on its website, drjsnatural.com, Dr. J’s Natural Defendants
`45.
`market Basic Immune IGG as a “protein powder” that can maintain “healthy
`immune function” and a “healthy immune system.”
`46. Similar claims also appear on Dr. J’s Natural Instagram page. For
`example, on June 1, 2020, Dr. J’s Natural posted a “COVID-19 Special Offer,”
`which offered a discount for Dr. J’s Basic Immune IGG, and promised that the
`product would “boost up your immune system.”
`In videos, however, the Dr. J’s Natural Defendants make very
`47.
`different representations. Specifically, they claim ingesting Basic Immune IGG
`
`-10-
`
` 1
` 2
` 3
` 4
` 5
` 6
` 7
` 8
` 9
` 10
` 11
` 12
` 13
` 14
` 15
` 16
` 17
` 18
` 19
` 20
` 21
` 22
` 23
` 24
` 25
` 26
` 27
` 28
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-01431-JLS-KES Document 1 Filed 08/04/20 Page 11 of 19 Page ID #:11
`
`
`
` 1
` 2
` 3
` 4
` 5
` 6
` 7
` 8
` 9
` 10
` 11
` 12
` 13
` 14
` 15
` 16
` 17
` 18
` 19
` 20
` 21
` 22
` 23
` 24
` 25
` 26
` 27
` 28
`
`
`can prevent transmission of COVID-19; that Basic Immune IGG is FDA approved
`for that purpose; and that Basic Immune IGG has been clinically tested and
`approved for prevention of COVID-19 transmission.
`48. The strongest claims appear in Vietnamese language videos. For
`example, on or about April 2, 2020, Dr. J appeared on a newscast on Saigon
`Entertainment Television (SET), a California-based station broadcasting to
`Vietnamese speakers in the United States. In that appearance she told consumers
`that Basic Immune IGG could “prevent” COVID-19 by boosting the immune
`system, explaining:
`
`Dr. J: let’s say if I sit next to Mr. Do Dung or someone else or happen
`to touch something and get infected with COVID-19, at least I have
`already had more antibodies that can detect the invasion and cling to
`and attack the coronavirus. It’s like, the antibodies will say, “hey,
`bacteria are penetrating the body, let’s come and fight it off.”
`
`49. Dr. J further claimed that mixing Basic Immune IGG with drinking
`water could ward off COVID-19. For instance, during the same newscast she
`explained:
`
`
`Dr. J: . . . the immunoglobulin antibody therapy that I take with this
`powder, like how I drank and showed you earlier, is to increase my
`existing antibodies and make them stronger. The product helps
`strengthen the army of soldiers already present in my body. Then, let's
`say if one coronavirus happens to infiltrate my body, I already have
`about five hundred thousand antibodies, thanks to this powder. They
`would cling to and bite that coronavirus, push it out and kill it. . . .
`And now if Mr. Do Dung or our dearest audience haven’t taken this
`antibody powder yet, it means that if the coronavirus enters your
`
`-11-
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-01431-JLS-KES Document 1 Filed 08/04/20 Page 12 of 19 Page ID #:12
`
`
`
` 1
` 2
` 3
` 4
` 5
` 6
` 7
` 8
` 9
` 10
` 11
` 12
` 13
` 14
` 15
` 16
` 17
` 18
` 19
` 20
` 21
` 22
` 23
` 24
` 25
` 26
` 27
` 28
`
`
`body, Mr. Do Dung and you only have 5,000 antibodies while I have
`500,000 of them, because I have been taking this antibody powder.
`
`50. She also represented, in close proximity to these claims during the
`same newscast, that Basic Immune IGG has been FDA approved and undergone
`clinical trials. For example, in response to the question “Is it guaranteed that we
`will stay safe?” Dr. J responds, “It’s guaranteed, because there is FDA’s
`verification and approval.” She also states: “Our parent company is the only
`company obtaining the registered trademark for this antibody product from the
`FDA []. We have conducted clinical studies, involving the extraction and
`cultivation of antibodies taken from cow blood, which is then made into this
`antibody powder.”
`51. Dr. J makes similar claims in Vietnamese on SET during her regularly
`broadcast show, the Dr. J’s Natural Show.
`52. Dr. J also made similar claims in English-language videos appearing
`on YouTube. For example, in a June 8, 2020 video in which Dr. J responds to
`questions regarding COVID-19 from consumers, she addresses the question “What
`is the best preventative measure to take now?” Her response—use Dr. J’s hand
`sanitizer and take Basic Immune IGG. Basic Immune IGG will boost the immune
`system, “so just in case you get infected with the virus, then your body will be able
`to fight back and destroy all the Coronavirus that is entering your body.”
`53. Similarly, in a June 11, 2020 English-language YouTube video titled,
`“How Does Immune IGG Work,” Dr. J claimed that Basic Immune IGG had been
`clinically tested, was a “prevention” for COVID-19, and had a “patent” from the
`FDA.
`
`In the June 11 video, Dr. J claimed Basic Immune IGG helps the body
`54.
`recognize viruses, “especially Coronavirus” and the product has “tons of clinical
`data.”
`
`-12-
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-01431-JLS-KES Document 1 Filed 08/04/20 Page 13 of 19 Page ID #:13
`
`
`
`In fact, Basic Immune IGG/Immunolin is not an FDA-approved
`55.
`treatment or preventative for COVID-19.
`56. Moreover, there are no published adequate and well controlled clinical
`studies of Basic Immune IGG, Immunolin, or a serum-derived bovine
`immunoglobulin for use to effectively treat, prevent, or reduce the risk of
`contracting COVID-19. In fact, there are no published studies of any kind for
`Basic Immune IGG or Immunolin.
`VIOLATIONS OF THE MAIL, INTERNET, OR TELEPHONE ORDER
`MERCHANDISE RULE
`57. MITOR, 16 C.F.R. Part 435, prohibits sellers from soliciting any
`order for the sale of merchandise ordered through the mail, via the Internet or by
`telephone “unless, at the time of the solicitation, the seller has a reasonable basis to
`expect that it will be able to ship any ordered merchandise to the buyer” either
`“[w]ithin that time clearly and conspicuously stated in any such solicitation; or [i]f
`no time is clearly and conspicuously stated, within thirty (30) days after receipt of
`a properly completed order from the buyer.” 16 C.F.R. § 435.2(a)(1).
`“Receipt of a properly completed order” means “where the buyer
`58.
`tenders full or partial payment . . . the time at which a seller receives both said
`payment and an order from the buyer containing all of the information needed by
`the seller to process and ship the order.” 16 C.F.R. § 435.1(c).
`“Shipment” means the act of physically placing the merchandise in
`59.
`the possession of a carrier. 16 C.F.R. § 435.1(e).
`60. Where a seller is unable to ship merchandise within the time stated in
`the solicitation or within 30 days, if no time is given, the seller must offer to the
`buyer “clearly and conspicuously and without prior demand, an option either to
`consent to a delay in shipping or to cancel the buyer’s order and receive a prompt
`refund.” 16 C.F.R. § 435.2(b)(1).
`
`-13-
`
` 1
` 2
` 3
` 4
` 5
` 6
` 7
` 8
` 9
` 10
` 11
` 12
` 13
` 14
` 15
` 16
` 17
` 18
` 19
` 20
` 21
` 22
` 23
` 24
` 25
` 26
` 27
` 28
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-01431-JLS-KES Document 1 Filed 08/04/20 Page 14 of 19 Page ID #:14
`
`
`
`a. Any such offer “shall be made within a reasonable time after the
`seller first becomes aware of its inability to ship,” but in no event
`later than the time stated or within 30 days if no time is stated. 16
`C.F.R. § 4352(b)(1).
`b. The offer must fully inform the buyer of the buyer’s right to cancel
`and provide a definite revised shipping date or inform the buyer
`that the seller cannot make any representation regarding the length
`of the delay. 16 C.F.R. § 435.2(b)(1)(i).
`61. A seller must “deem an order cancelled and . . . make a prompt refund
`to the buyer whenever the seller receives, prior to the time of shipment, notification
`from the buyer cancelling the order pursuant to any option [under MITOR] . . . [or]
`[t]he seller fails to offer the option [to consent to a delay or cancel required by
`§ 435.2(b)(1)] and has not shipped the merchandise” within the time required by
`MITOR. 16 C.F.R. § (c)(4), (5).
`62. Pursuant to Section 18(d)(3) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 57a(d)(3),
`and 16 C.F.R. Part 435.2 a violation of the Rule constitutes an unfair or deceptive
`act or practice in violation of Section 5(a) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(a).
`Count I- MITOR Violations
`(QYK Defendants)
`In numerous instances, when the QYK Defendants:
`a. represent they will ship purchased goods within the one to two (1
`to 2) days, three to five days (3 to 5), or three to seven (3 to 7)
`days, they do not have a reasonable basis to expect to ship the
`goods within the timeframes they promise;
`b. fail to ship orders within the timeframe required by MITOR, they
`also fail to offer customers the opportunity to consent to a delay in
`shipping or to cancel their order and receive a prompt refund;
`
`63.
`
`-14-
`
` 1
` 2
` 3
` 4
` 5
` 6
` 7
` 8
` 9
` 10
` 11
` 12
` 13
` 14
` 15
` 16
` 17
` 18
` 19
` 20
` 21
` 22
` 23
` 24
` 25
` 26
` 27
` 28
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-01431-JLS-KES Document 1 Filed 08/04/20 Page 15 of 19 Page ID #:15
`
`
`
`c. fail to ship orders within the timeframe required by MITOR and
`fail to offer consumers the opportunity to consent to a delay in
`shipping or to cancel their order, they do not cancel those orders or
`provide consumers a prompt refund;
`d. receive cancellation and refund requests from consumers pursuant
`to any option under MITOR, they do not deem those orders
`cancelled or provide a prompt refund.
`64. Defendants’ practices as alleged in Paragraph 63 violate MITOR, 16
`C.F.R. § 435.2(a), (b), and (c), and therefore are unfair or deceptive acts or
`practices in violation of Section 5 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(a).
`VIOLATIONS OF THE FTC ACT
`65. Section 5(a) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(a), prohibits “unfair or
`deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce.”
`66. Misrepresentations or deceptive omissions of material fact constitute
`deceptive acts or practices prohibited by Section 5(a) of the FTC Act.
`67. Section 12 of the FTC Action, 15. U.S.C. § 52, prohibits the
`dissemination of any false advertisement in or affecting commerce for the purpose
`of inducing, or which is likely to induce, the purchase of food, drugs, devices,
`services, or cosmetics. For purposes of Section 12 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 52,
`Basic Immune IGG is a “food” or “drug” as “food” and “drug” are defined in
`Section 15(b) and (c) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C.§ 55(b) and (c).
`Count II- Deceptive Shipping Claims
`(QYK Defendants)
`In numerous instances in connection with the advertising, marketing,
`68.
`promotion, offering for sale, or sale of goods, specifically hand sanitizer and
`related products, the QYK Defendants have represented, directly or indirectly,
`expressly or by implication, that they:
`
`-15-
`
` 1
` 2
` 3
` 4
` 5
` 6
` 7
` 8
` 9
` 10
` 11
` 12
` 13
` 14
` 15
` 16
` 17
` 18
` 19
` 20
` 21
` 22
` 23
` 24
` 25
` 26
` 27
` 28
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-01431-JLS-KES Document 1 Filed 08/04/20 Page 16 of 19 Page ID #:16
`
`
`
`a. will ship goods the same day they are purchased, or will ship
`goods within seven (7) days;
`b. have goods in stock and ready to ship; and
`c. will deliver the goods consumers order.
`In truth and in fact, in numerous instances in which the QYK
`69.
`Defendants have made the representations set forth in Paragraph 68, the QYK
`Defendants:
`
`a. failed to ship goods the same day they were purchased, or failed to
`ship goods within seven (7) days;
`b. did not have sufficient goods in stock to make shipments as
`advertised; or
`c. delivered materially different goods.
`70. Therefore, Defendants’ representations set forth in Paragraph 68 are
`false, misleading, or unsubstantiated, and constitute deceptive acts or practices in
`violation of Section 5(a) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(a).
`Count III- Deceptive COVID-19 Prevention Claims
`(Dr. J’s Natural Defendants)
`71. Through the means described in Paragraphs 42-56, the Dr. J’s Natural
`Defendants have represented, directly or indirectly, expressly or by implication
`that Basic Immune IGG can effectively treat, prevent transmission of, or reduce the
`risk of contracting COVID-19.
`72. The representations set forth in Paragraph 71 are false, misleading or
`were not substantiated at the time the representations were made.
`73. Therefore, the making of the representations as set forth in Paragraph
`71 of this Complaint constitutes a deceptive act or practice and the making of false
`advertisements, in or affective commerce, in violation of Section 5(a) and 12 of the
`FTC Act, 15. U.S.C. §§ 45(a) and 52.
`
`
`-16-
`
` 1
` 2
` 3
` 4
` 5
` 6
` 7
` 8
` 9
` 10
` 11
` 12
` 13
` 14
` 15
` 16
` 17
` 18
` 19
` 20
` 21
` 22
` 23
` 24
` 25
` 26
` 27
` 28
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-01431-JLS-KES Document 1 Filed 08/04/20 Page 17 of 19 Page ID #:17
`
`
`
`Count IV-False Establishment Claims
`(Dr. J’s Natural Defendants)
`74. Through the means described in Paragraphs 42-56, Dr. J’s Natural
`Defendants have represented, directly or indirectly, expressly or by implication
`that Basic Immune IGG has been clinically proven and FDA-approved to treat,
`prevent transmission of, or reduce the risk of contracting COVID-19.
`75. The representations set forth in Paragraph 74 are false.
`76. Therefore, the making of the representations as set forth in Paragraph
`74 of this Complaint constitutes a deceptive act or practice and the making of false
`advertisements, in or affecting commerce, in violation of Sections 5(a) and 12 of
`the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 45(a) and 52.
`CONSUMER INJURY
`77. Consumers are suffering, have suffered, and will continue to suffer
`substantial injury as a result of Defendants’ violations of the FTC Act and MITOR.
`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 customers, reap unjust enrichment, and harm the public interest.
`THIS COURT’S POWER TO GRANT RELIEF
`78. Section 19 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 57b, and MITOR authorize
`this Court to grant such relief as the Court finds necessary to redress injury to
`consumers resulting from Defendants’ violations of MITOR, including the
`rescission or reformation of contracts and the refund of money.
`79. 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
`
`-17-
`
` 1
` 2
` 3
` 4
` 5
` 6
` 7
` 8
` 9
` 10
` 11
` 12
` 13
` 14
` 15
` 16
` 17
` 18
` 19
` 20
` 21
` 22
` 23
` 24
` 25
` 26
` 27
` 28
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-01431-JLS-KES Document 1 Filed 08/04/20 Page 18 of 19 Page ID #:18
`Case 8:20-cv-01431-JLS-KES Document 1 Filed 08/04/20 Page 18 of 19 Page ID #:18
`
`1
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`5
`6
`
`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 Sections 13(b) and 19 of the FTC Act,
`15 U.S.C. §§ 53(b), 57b, MITOR, and the Court’s own equitable powers, requests
`that the Court:
`
`Award Plaintiff such preliminary injunctive and ancillary relief as
`A.
`7
`8 may be necessary to avert the likelihood of consumer injury during the pendency
`9
`of this action and to preserve the possibility of effective final relief, including but
`10
`not limited to, temporary and preliminary injunctions;
`
`11
`
`B.
`
`Enter a permanent injunction to prevent future violations of the FTC
`
`12 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 and MITOR,
`
`including restitution, rescission or reformation of contracts, the refund of money or
`
`return of property, the payment of damages, and public notification respecting the
`
`rule violation or the unfair or deceptive act or practice; and
`
`D.
`
`Award Plaintiff the costs of bringing this action, as well as such other
`
`and additional relief as the Court may determine to bejust and proper.
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25 Dated: August 4, 2020
`
`26
`27
`28
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`ALDEN F. ABBOTT
`
`General Counsel
`
`
`
`hac vice pending
`THE