Federal Trade Commission v. Adept Management, Inc. et al

Filing 728

OPINION AND ORDER: Defendant's Motions for Reconsideration 705 717 718 and 720 are DENIED. Please access entire text by document number hyperlink. Ordered and Signed on 06/07/2019 by Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke. (rsm)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTR1CT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON MEDFORD DIVISION Civ. No. 1:16-cv-00720-CL FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, Plaintiff, OPINION AND ORDER v. ADEPT MANAGEMENT INC., et al, Defendants. CLARKE, Magistrate Judge. This case comes before the Court on post-trial motions. For the reasons below, Hoyal Defendants' Motion for Reconsideration (#705) is denied, the Simpson Defendants' Motion to Reconsider (#717) is denied, Defendant Lydia Puglsey's Motion for Reconsideration (#718) is denied, Defendant William Strickler's Motion for Reconsideration (#720) is denied. DISCUSSION I. Hoyal Defendants' Motion is Denied. The Hoyal Defendants move for reconsideration and for amendment to the Court's Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. They contend that a recent decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, FTC v. Shire Viropharma, Inc., 917 F .3d 147, No. 18-8071 (3d Cir. February 25, 2019), requires this Court to dismiss the claims against the defendants for past violations of the FTC Act. The Court disagrees. Page- I -ORDER First, the Court considered the Shire case prior to entering its Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. The Hoyal Defendants alerted the Court to the existence of the Third Circuit's decision in their Supplemental Conclusion of Law (#674), and the Court read and considered that filing prior to issuing its decision. The Court ultimately rejected the Shire case as contrary to well-established precedent in the Ninth Circuit and as distinguishable from the facts in the case at bar. The Hoyal Defendants' motion for reconsideration presents no new facts or legal authority, and the Court can find no reason to amend its prior decision. The motion is denied. II. Simpson Defendants' Motion to Reconsider is denied. The Simpson Defendants' motion is based on the same theory as the Hoyal Defendants' motion, and explicitly joins in that motion as well. For the same reasons discussed above, the Simpson Defendants' motion is denied. III. Defendant Lydia Pugsley and William Strickler's motions are denied. Defendants Lydia Pugsley and William Strickler move to join in the motions filed by the Hoyal defendants. These motions are denied for the reasons below. ORDER Defendants' motions for reconsideration(## 705, 717, 718, 720) are denied. United States Magistrate Judge Page 2 - ORDER

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?