Eacononomy has been denied contempt sanctions against defendant Auvoria Prime.
As part of its ongoing lawsuit against Auvoria Prime, Eaconomy requested contempt sanctions back in June.
In their motion, Eaconomy evidence its affiliates, Michael Cuevas was provided as an example, were still being targeted for recruitment by Catalina Naranjo, an Auvoria Prime affiliate.
This, the company argued, was taking place in concert with Auvoria Prime and in violation of a previously granted restraining order.
In denying Eaconomy’s motion, the court found lacking evidence that Auvoria Prime and its executives had worked with Naranjo.
Defendants are not in violation of the court’s TRO if Naranjo contacted Cuevas without their involvement.
The court accepted Naranjo’s position as Auvoria Prime’s “Head of Education – Latin American – Spanish”, but remained “unpersuaded by plaintiff’s evidence.”
While Naranjo held herself out as the “head of education, Latin America, Spanish” in the voice message left for Cuevas, nowhere in the message did she represent herself was acting on behalf of either defendant.
It is not reasonable to infer that by merely featuring Naranjo on Auvoria’s website, defendants gave Naranjo the ostensible authority to solicit plaintiff’s distributors in violation of the TRO.
Naranjo’s role wasn’t deemed enough to demonstrate she represented Auvoria Prime as an agent.
With respect to Auvoria Prime not meeting its obligation to inform its affiliates of the TRO, the court found
the second email message sent by defendants addresses the majority of the arguments raised by plaintiff in its motion and reply.
Eaconomy’s motion was denied on August 28th.
Looking forward, the court has continued the initial scheduling conference to October 28th.
I’ve marked our next case docket check for October 29th.