Complaint Counsel's Post Trial Brief - Federal Trade Commission
Complaint Counsel's Post Trial Brief - Federal Trade Commission
Complaint Counsel's Post Trial Brief - Federal Trade Commission
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
TABLE OF CONTENTS<br />
i. <strong>Complaint</strong> <strong>Counsel's</strong> Proposed Findings of Fact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1<br />
A. Danel Chapter One And The Feijos ................................... 1<br />
B. The FTC Has Jursdiction Over Respondent DCO, Whch Is A Corporation<br />
Withi The Meang Of Section 4 Of The FTC Act, And Respondent<br />
James F eijo. ...................................................................................................... ....... 2<br />
1. Respondents Are Engaged In Commerce ......................... 2<br />
2. Respondent James Feijo Controls Respondent DCO's Finances And<br />
Operations............... ................................. .......... ........... ............. ............ ..... 8<br />
3. Respondents Do Not Maitain Records. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9<br />
4. Respondents Profit From The Sale Of The DCO Products. . . .. .. . . .. .9<br />
C. Respondents Clai That Their Products Cure, Mitigate, Treat, Or Prevent Cancer<br />
Or Tumors...............................................................................................................12<br />
D. Respondents Dissemate Claims About Their Products to Consuiers . . . . . . . 19<br />
E. Respondents Did Not Possess Substantiation For Such Claims At the Time They<br />
Were Made. ................ ....... ........................................ .... .......................... ............... 20<br />
F. Dr. Miler Confirms That There Is No Competent And Reliable Scientific<br />
Evidence To Substantiate The Claims That DCO'S Products Treat, Cure, Or<br />
Prevent Cancer....................................................................................................... 22<br />
G. Respondents' Purorted Experts Do Not Possess Any Information Substantiating<br />
Respondents' Clais And Reinforce Dr. Miler's Conclusion That No Competent<br />
And Reliable Scientific Evidence Exists To Support Respondents' Clais. . . .24<br />
II. Complait <strong>Counsel's</strong> Proposed Conclusions of Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40
Change language