Last month we covered the Jason and Eunjung Cardiff’s attempt to have FTC proceedings against them stayed, pending a since withdrawn appeal against the sale of their house.

The Cardiffs also argued “they were not afforded due process”, and had a whinge about most of their motions being denied.

The court disagreed and denied the Cardiffs’ stay request.

If you’ve been following the Redwood Scientific Case the latest order shouldn’t come as a surprise.

Indeed the Cardiffs’ attempts to stall regulatory proceedings attracted
pointed commentary
from the FTC.

The other major filing in the case is a May 29th show cause motion by the FTC.

The FTC alleges defendant Jacques Poujade “stubbornly continues to violate” court orders.

At issue is Poujade “producing certain documents” by a November 2019 deadline.

The Court required Poujade to produce “all communications of any type” involving Jason Cardiff, Eunjung Cardiff, Poujade, and certain business associates.

Instead of complying, Poujade filed a meritless interlocutory appeal and separately filed motions to stay which were denied by both this Court.

To date Poujade has failed to provide the requested documents, meaning
previously granted monetary sanctions
are enforceable.

Poujade filed opposition to the FTC’s December 29th motion on June 5th.

In his opposition Poujade’s attorney claims Poujade has been denied an opportunity to challenge the FTC’s request for information. He also claims a previously granted contempt order against Poujade is “erroneous”.

Judge Otero’s erroneous order finding Mr. Poujade in contempt is a final judgment on the only matter concerning Mr. Poujade that is before the Court

That order has been appealed in the Ninth Circuit, with Poujade’s attorney arguing the appeal takes the issue out of the Californian District Court’s jurisdiction.

An included FTC communication to Poujade’s attorney (cited in Poujade’s objection), provides insight into why the FTC is interested in the requested information.

Are you telling me that Jacques Poujade will not ask his brother, who has been transferring him hundreds of thousands of dollars from Pharmastrip, to make his bank records available for inspection?

Poujade’s attorney frames the FTC’s request as harassment. Looking at the bigger picture, it appears to be part of the FTC’s efforts to piece together the flow of money in companies tied to the Cardiffs.

Somewhere in there is probably also evidence of Poujade assisting the Cardiffs with injunction violations, which is the suspected reason Poujade hasn’t complied.

That’s supported by documents Poujade has allegedly already provided to the FTC, that revealed

other accounts that allowed the FTC to trace TPI funds that were eventually used as a loan to Jason Cardiff.

That’s just the tip of the $1.56 million CAD iceberg.

Pending a ruling on the FTC’s show cause motion, stay tuned.

The other news in the Redwood case is the scheduling of a December 1st, 2020. This was part of th

🤖 Quick Answer

What was the outcome of the Cardiffs' request to stay FTC proceedings?
The court denied the Cardiffs' motion to stay FTC proceedings that had been filed pending their appeal against the sale of their house. The Cardiffs had argued they were denied due process and that most of their motions were rejected, but the court disagreed with their arguments and dismissed the stay request.

What allegations did the FTC raise against Jacques Poujade?
The FTC filed a May 29th show cause motion alleging that defendant Jacques Poujade "stubbornly continues to violate" court orders, specifically regarding his failure to produce certain required documents by the November deadline established by the court.

🔗 Related Articles

- Scott Chandler and Louis Gatto defy court order to disclose assets
- CFTC secures Fundsz Ponzi asset-freeze, owners charged
- BidForMyMeds threaten legal action over review
- Howard Kaplan denied Receiver deposition, trial date set (Zeek Rewards)
- Traffic Monsoon flat sell-off prompts Hague Convention request