Eacononomy has been denied contempt sanctions against defendant Auvoria Prime.
As part of its ongoing lawsuit against Auvoria Prime, Eaconomy
requested contempt sanctions
back in June.
In their motion, Eaconomy evidence its affiliates, Michael Cuevas was provided as an example, were still being targeted for recruitment by Catalina Naranjo, an Auvoria Prime affiliate.
This, the company argued, was taking place in concert with Auvoria Prime and in violation of a
previously granted restraining order
.
In denying Eaconomy’s motion, the court found lacking evidence that Auvoria Prime and its executives had worked with Naranjo.
Defendants are not in violation of the court’s TRO if Naranjo contacted Cuevas without their involvement.
The court accepted Naranjo’s position as Auvoria Prime’s “Head of Education – Latin American – Spanish”, but remained “unpersuaded by plaintiff’s evidence.”
While Naranjo held herself out as the “head of education, Latin America, Spanish” in the voice message left for Cuevas, nowhere in the message did she represent herself was acting on behalf of either defendant.
It is not reasonable to infer that by merely featuring Naranjo on Auvoria’s website, defendants gave Naranjo the ostensible authority to solicit plaintiff’s distributors in violation of the TRO.
Naranjo’s role wasn’t deemed enough to demonstrate she represented Auvoria Prime as an agent.
With respect to Auvoria Prime not meeting its obligation to inform its affiliates of the TRO, the court found
the second email message sent by defendants addresses the majority of the arguments raised by plaintiff in its motion and reply.
Eaconomy’s motion was denied on August 28th.
Looking forward, the court has continued the initial scheduling conference to October 28th.
I’ve marked our next case docket check for October 29th.
Update 29th October 2020 –
The initial scheduling conference has been continued to December 16th.
Update 17th December 2020 –
Eaconomy has
dropped its lawsuit
against Auvoria Prime.
🤖 Quick Answer
What was Eaconomy's contempt sanctions request against Auvoria Prime based on?Eaconomy sought contempt sanctions alleging that Auvoria Prime affiliate Catalina Naranjo continued recruiting company affiliates, including Michael Cuevas, in violation of a previously granted restraining order, claiming the activity occurred in concert with Auvoria Prime's executives.
Why did the court deny Eaconomy's motion for contempt sanctions?
The court found insufficient evidence demonstrating that Auvoria Prime and its executives collaborated with Catalina Naranjo. Since Naranjo allegedly contacted Cuevas independently without company involvement, defendants were not found in violation of the temporary restraining order.
🔗 Related Articles
- eAdGear (GoFunRewards) owners indicted on felony charge
- The iGalen, Valentus & ATM Metabolics Emulin dispute
- BlackOxygen Organics class-action alleges supplement toxicity
- Brian Underwood responds to Rutherford’s Pruvit lawsuit
- Brandon Frye cops $600,000 DIS default judgment