9313-Telebrands\reply fof



Download 261.56 Kb.
View original pdf
Page1/64
Date26.07.2018
Size261.56 Kb.
  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   64


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
In the Matter of
)
)
TELEBRANDS CORP.,
)
a corporation,
)
)
TV SAVINGS, LLC, a limited liability company, and
)
)
DOCKET NO. 9313
AJIT KHUBANI,
)
individually and as president of
)
PUBLIC DOCUMENT
Telebrands Corp. and sole member of TV Savings, LLC.
)
)
COMPLAINT COUNSEL'S REPLY FINDINGS OF FACT
AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW


-2-
I. PROCEDURAL
BACKGROUND
1. The Complaint in this matter issued on September 30, 2003. (CX 1; Complaint date found at www.ftc.gov______).
Response to Finding No. Compliant Counsel have no specific response. Respondents filed their Answer on October 23, 2003 (Answer, available at www.ftc.gov______).
Response to Finding No. Compliant Counsel have no specific response. An initial Scheduling Order was issued by Chief Administrative Law Judge Stephen J.
McGuire on November 5, 2003. (Available at www.ftc.gov______).
The Scheduling Order was subsequently revised on March 12, 2004 by stipulation of the parties. (Available on www.ftc.gov______). Response to Finding No. Compliant Counsel have no specific response. Trial commenced in this matter pursuant to 16 C.F.R. § 3.41 on May 4, Response to Finding No. Compliant Counsel have no specific response. The last day in which testimony was received was May 6, 2004. The parties subsequently submitted a Third Joint Stipulation on May 14, 2004. (JX Response to Finding No. Compliant Counsel have no specific response. The parties filed and served Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on June 2,
2004. The parties filed and served Reply Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on June, 2004. Response to Finding No. Compliant Counsel have no specific response.


-3-
7. The parties submitted oral closing argument in this matter on June 17, 2004. Response to Finding No. Compliant Counsel have no specific response.


Ii. findings of fact concerning the factual background
B. telebrands and its business
C. ems ab products on the market during the relevant time
D. telebrands decides to enter the ems ab product market
Advertising campaign
E. the test advertisements
Test advertising performance
F. telebrands rollout of the product
Telebrands revises radio and television advertising prior to rollout
Telebrands prepares user’s manuals referencing massage
G. summary of findings regarding the factual background
Iii. findings of fact concerning expert testimony
B. the facial analysis offered by dr. mazis
Effectsa. dr. mazis offered the opinion that consumers may perceive weight loss and
Dr. mazis ignored these other ems ab products in making his facial
There is no reliable basis for dr. mazis’ assumption that consumers
Complaint counsel has offered no other evidence to establish that
Infomercial monitoring service reports
Summary of findings regarding evidence provided by advertisers and shippers,
Ab force and advertisements for abtronic, ab energizer and fast abs is
C. the copy test
Dr. mazis engaged in a faulty analysis of the results
D. summary of findings regarding extrinsic evidence
Conclusions of law
Ii. legal standard and analytical framework
A.framework for determining if the challenged claims
Standards for employing a facial analysis
Standards for considering extrinsic evidence
B. framework for determining whether claims are likely
C. framework for determining whether claims were
Iii. the challenged advertising did not make the asserted
The extrinsic evidence proffered at trial does not



Share with your friends:
  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   64


The database is protected by copyright ©userg.info 2017
send message

    Main page

bosch
camera
chevrolet
epson
fiat
Honda
iphone
mitsubishi
nissan
Panasonic
Sony
volvo
xiaomi
Xperia
yamaha