Lee v. F. T. C., No. 79-1286

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
Writing for the CourtBefore TAMM and WALD; PER CURIAM
Citation679 F.2d 905
PartiesRaymond LEE, Petitioner, v. FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, Respondent.
Decision Date06 June 1980
Docket NumberNo. 79-1286

Page 905

679 F.2d 905
220 U.S.App.D.C. 87
Raymond LEE, Petitioner,
v.
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, Respondent.
No. 79-1286.
United States Court of Appeals,
District of Columbia Circuit.
June 6, 1980.

Petition for Review of an Order of the Federal Trade commission.

Before TAMM and WALD, Circuit Judges and GASCH *, United States District Court Judge for the District of Columbia.

AMENDED JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

This cause came on to be heard on the petition for review of an order of the Federal Trade Commission and was argued by counsel. On consideration of the foregoing, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED by this Court, that the order of the Federal Trade Commission under review herein is hereby affirmed, and the Commission's order enforced, for the reasons set forth in the attached memorandum.

MEMORANDUM

Raymond Lee appeals an order of the Federal Trade Commission enjoining him and the Raymond Lee Organization (RLO), an "idea promotion" firm, from engaging in false and deceptive practices. He claims the order is both overbroad and unlawful in restricting his future personal activities. We find the Commission's order lawful, and, accordingly, we affirm.

The Commission filed an administrative complaint on July 15, 1975, against Raymond Lee, RLO, and Lawrence Peska, a former official of the organization, claiming they violated section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45 (1976), by deceiving customers who contracted for their invention promotion services. An Administrative Law Judge held forty days of hearings, at which eighty-six witnesses testified. On the basis of the evidence presented, he concluded that the defendants had violated section 5. Raymond Lee Organization, Inc., 92 F.T.C. 489 (1978) (initial

Page 906

decision). He issued a cease and desist order prohibiting future misrepresentations by the respondents about the value or nature of RLO's services. On appeal, the Commission affirmed the Administrative Law Judge's findings, concluding:

(T)he record convincingly demonstrates that respondents provide worthless services that bear little resemblance to what they tout in their advertising, promotional, and sales pitches. These unfair and deceptive practices are exacerbated by respondents' acceptance and retention of the substantial fees that inventors pay in the reasonable hope and expectation that respondents will provide the expert assistance they represent.

Id. at 637 (opinion). The Commission amended the order to require Lee to cease and desist...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 practice notes
  • Practice and procedure: Patent and trademark cases rules of practice; representation of others before Patent and Trademark Office,
    • United States
    • Federal Register December 12, 2003
    • December 12, 2003
    ...promoter for invention development services. See Raymond Lee Organization, Inc., 92 F.T.C. 489 (1978), aff'd sub nom. Raymond Lee v. FTC, 679 F.2d 905 (D.C. Cir. 1980); FTC v. Invention Submission Corp., 1991-1 Trade Cases Sec. 69,338, 1991 WL 47104 (D.D.C 1991); FTC v. American Institute f......
  • Part II
    • United States
    • Federal Register December 12, 2003
    • December 12, 2003
    ...promoter for invention development services. See Raymond Lee Organization, Inc., 92 F.T.C. 489 (1978), aff'd sub nom. Raymond Lee v. FTC, 679 F.2d 905 (D.C. Cir. 1980); FTC v. Invention Submission Corp., 1991-1 Trade Cases Sec. 69,338, 1991 WL 47104 (D.D.C 1991); FTC v. American Institute f......
  • Consumer Protection Div. Office of Atty. Gen. v. Consumer Pub. Co., Inc.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Maryland
    • September 1, 1984
    ...Corp. v. F.T.C., 542 F.2d 611, 617 (3d Cir.1976), cert. denied, 430 U.S. 983, 97 S.Ct. 1679, 52 L.Ed.2d 377 (1977). Accord Lee v. F.T.C., 679 F.2d 905 (D.C.Cir.1980); F.T.C. v. Gibson Products, 569 F.2d 900 (5th Cir.1978); Feil v. F.T.C., 285 F.2d 879 (9th Cir.1960). Although some cases inv......
  • FTC v. Kitco of Nevada, Inc., Civ. No. 4-83-467.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. United States District Court of Minnesota
    • June 7, 1985
    ...Cir.1975), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 827, 96 S.Ct. 41, 46 L.Ed.2d 42 (1975); The Raymond Lee Organization, 92 F.T.C. 489, 619 (1978), aff'd, 679 F.2d 905 (D.C.Cir. 3. Liability as Principal In addition to liability based on direct participation in the deceptive sale of 612 F. Supp. 1293 busine......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
6 cases
  • Consumer Protection Div. Office of Atty. Gen. v. Consumer Pub. Co., Inc.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Maryland
    • September 1, 1984
    ...Corp. v. F.T.C., 542 F.2d 611, 617 (3d Cir.1976), cert. denied, 430 U.S. 983, 97 S.Ct. 1679, 52 L.Ed.2d 377 (1977). Accord Lee v. F.T.C., 679 F.2d 905 (D.C.Cir.1980); F.T.C. v. Gibson Products, 569 F.2d 900 (5th Cir.1978); Feil v. F.T.C., 285 F.2d 879 (9th Cir.1960). Although some cases inv......
  • FTC v. Kitco of Nevada, Inc., Civ. No. 4-83-467.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. United States District Court of Minnesota
    • June 7, 1985
    ...Cir.1975), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 827, 96 S.Ct. 41, 46 L.Ed.2d 42 (1975); The Raymond Lee Organization, 92 F.T.C. 489, 619 (1978), aff'd, 679 F.2d 905 (D.C.Cir. 3. Liability as Principal In addition to liability based on direct participation in the deceptive sale of 612 F. Supp. 1293 busine......
  • State v. Vertrue, Inc., No. 11–0449.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • July 5, 2013
    ...are insuffic[ient] to counter the overall impression fostered by RLO's written and oral representations.”), aff'd sub nom Lee v. FTC, 679 F.2d 905 (D.C.Cir.1980). Here, the second request for consent did not alleviate the misleading net impression because it did not repeat the terms of the ......
  • American Genealogies, Inc. v. US Postal Service, Civ. A. No. 88-1612.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. United States District Court (Columbia)
    • July 17, 1989
    ...with respect to a single product so as "to prevent the resurrection of discontinued practices." Lee v. Federal Trade Commission, 679 F.2d 905, 906 (D.C.Cir.1980); see also Federal Trade Commission v. Colgate-Palmolive, Co., 380 U.S. 374, 395, 85 S.Ct. 1035, 1048, 13 L.Ed.2d 904 (1965) (hold......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT