110.  FTC v. AMP Publications, Web Publications, Inc., Ranjit Narayan dba Nationwide Publications, Inc., ANA Keilty dba Keilty Enterprises: No. SACV 00-112 AHS-ANX (C.D. Cal. filed Feb. 1, 2000)

111.  FTC v. Home Professions, Inc., Civ. No. SACV 00-111-AHA (EEx) (C.D. Cal. filed Feb. 1, 2000)

112.  FTC v. Innovative Productions and Shane D. Walls, No. 3-00CV0312-D (N.D. Tex. filed Feb. 10, 2000)

113.  FTC v. MediWorks, Inc., Civil No. 00-01079CAS (MANx) (C.D. Cal. filed Feb. 1, 2000)

114.  FTC v. Transworld Enterprises, Inc., No. 00 8126-CIV-GRAHAM (S.D. Fla. filed Feb. 17, 2000)

Type:  Investment Scam

The FTC, the Justice Department and law enforcement officials from 29 states announced Project Biz-illion$, a multi-pronged attack on business opportunity scams. As part of the sweep, the FTC, the Office of Consumer Litigation of the Department of Justice, state attorneys general and state securities officials filed over 68 cases against these deceptive schemes. The cases listed here involved solicitations made via Internet Web sites or email.

The defendants here allegedly promised substantial income through work-at-home (AMP), medical billing (Home Professions, Mediworks), envelope stuffing (Innovative Productions), ATM vending (Transworld), cigar vending (McGlothlin), or coffee vending (Worldwide Coffee) opportunities. The FTC alleged that defendants specific earnings claims were false in violation of the FTC Act, and in some cases, that the defendants failed to provide an earnings claim document as required by the FTC’s Franchise Rule.

In February 2001, the court entered a $4.9 million default judgment against AMP and Narayan and permanently banned them from engaging in the sale of work-at-home business opportunities.  Under a related settlement, CWP and Keilty are barred from marketing or selling any work-at-home business opportunity for seven years and are prohibited from making false and misleading statements when engaging in the promotion or sale of any product or service. The settlement further prohibits them from selling or disclosing their customer lists. Finally, the settlement contains various record-keeping provisions to assist the FTC in monitoring the defendants' compliance with the order.

The Commission vote authorizing staff to file the proposed settlement was 5 -0. The stipulated order for permanent injunctive relief was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, in Santa Ana, on March 23, 2001, and entered by the court on March 27, 2001.

http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2000/03/biz.htm (press release - sweep)