Sign Up

NCLA Site Search

Cases

FTC v. PPO

CASE: Federal Trade Commission v. Precision Patient Outcomes, Inc. and Margrett Priest Lewis

STATUS: Closed

NCLA ROLE: Counsel

COURTS HEARD IN: N.D. Cal.

ORIGINAL COURT: U.S. District Court Northern District of California

DECIDING COURT: U.S. District Court Northern District of California

OPENED: November 18, 2022

AGENCIES: Federal Trade Commission

FOCUS AREAS:

Due Process Violations

The due process of law guarantees a right to be held to account only through the processes of an impartial court—something administrative tribunals violate every day.

Administrative Speech Controls

The Administrative State tries to squelch speech, especially through licensing, speech bans, and speech mandates. Licensing requires one to get the government’s permission prior to speaking. Nothing was more clearly forbidden by the First Amendment than prior restraints on speech, but such controls are now commonplace.

NCLA challenged the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) lawsuit against Margrett Lewis and her California-based company Precision Patient Outcomes, Inc. (PPO), which the agency falsely accused of illegally selling a supplement called “Covid Resist.”

PPO developed a supplement called “Covid Resist” in 2021. CEO and Ms. Lewis asked FTC if there were any problems with the product’s name and proposed marketing before selling it to any consumers. FTC responded with a letter refusing to answer her question, providing her detailing hundreds of pages about companies the agency had sued or to which it had sent warning letters. PPO dropped the trademark and changed the product’s name to remove all mention of “Covid” on their own initiative before selling any of it. FTC’s initial Complaint claimed PPO and Ms. Lewis of illegally sold Covid Resist, and the agency only filed an Amended Complaint removing this falsehood after NCLA reminded them that this was impossible.

FTC has no particular competence in the capabilities of dietary supplements. None of the statutes it has cited to justify its actions against PPO say anything about dietary supplements, and the agency has not issued any regulations on such products. Congress has passed a statute that explicitly charges the Food and Drug Administration with standardizing what can and cannot be said about dietary supplements, and FTC has no jurisdiction over that law. NCLA also argued against FTC’s structure, which violates constitutional executive power requirements. Its commissioners serve staggered terms that prevent one president from controlling the whole agency, as the Chief Executive cannot fire them at will.

Mark Chenoweth
President and Chief Legal Officer
Kara Rollins
Litigation Counsel
John J. Vecchione
Senior Litigation Counsel
Casey Norman
Litigation Counsel
NCLA FILINGS

Stipulated Order for Permanent Injunction and Other Relief

February 15, 2024 | Read More

Order of Recusal

July 26, 2023 | Read More

Motion for Recusal of a District Judge Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §455 and Reassignment

June 30, 2023 | Read More

Answer to First Amended Complaint for Permanent Injunction, Monetary Relief, Civil Penalty Judgment and Other Relief and Counterclaim

May 17, 2023 | Read More

Defendants’ Reply to Plaintiff’s Response to Motion to Dismiss

February 24, 2023 | Read More

PRESS RELEASES

NCLA Secures Truce in Federal Trade Commission’s Unjust War Against Startup Company

February 16, 2024 | Read More

NCLA Asks Federal Court to Dismiss Unconstitutional Lawsuit FTC Has No Authority to Bring

February 6, 2023 | Read More

NCLA Condemns Federal Trade Commission’s Inclusion of Untrue Claims in Federal Court Complaint

December 6, 2022 | Read More

RELATED CASES

SHARE THIS CASE

Enter your email address above to be notified whenever we post a new document to this case.