FTC vs Jay Noland

This is an opinion, based on information developed upon researching the FTC actions against Jay Noland, his wife, some executives, and many distributors.

Time for an “UPDATE” on the Success By Health atrocity known in the courts as “FTC- versus Jay Noland”, I referred to this in a previous article:  (As a possible title for a book) — “An American Self-made Success Story— Climbing to the Summit in Professional Sports, Society, and as an Entrepreneur:  Only to be thrown off the cliff by the un-elected U.S. Government Officials that are free to do so.”  

Here is an additional title considered for this odyssey: 
“TARGET:  American Bias against a Black Entrepreneur.”   

The attorneys for the Defendants filed a June 26, 2020 Motion in the United State District Court for the District of Arizona.  This motion was precipitated by the Receiver previously determining that Enhanced Capital Funding assets (previously frozen) were ZEROED OUT by the Receiver.  Enhanced Capital Funding is a traditional business owned by Jay Noland in existence for 18 years.

According to a recent June 26, 2020 Supreme Court Ruling, The Liu v. SEC, the Receiver’s seizure of the assets from Enhanced Capital Funding is ILLEGAL. It was further decided in this case, that the only restitution allowed, and the only thing that may be seized for restitution is the NET PROFITS or gain from wrongful conduct. 

As I exhale and breathe, let me pause and bring in Seven extremely poignant observations here: 

1. Could a Multi-Racial, visibly Black man have been targeted all along?  Stacie Bosley, the Associate Professor of Economics at Hamline University, St. Paul, MN testified, at the February Preliminary Hearing, as the FTC’s Expert Witness.  Ms. Bosely used words in her own testimony:  Linking the MLM business model to the “KKK”: Substantiating her claim that people are ‘intrigued’ by this type of comparison. WHO finds the KKK intriguing?  NOT me, not Jay Noland,  nor his 2 ‘white’ co-defendants, or anyone in the company called Success By Health, especially when the CEO/Founder penned a blog ‘The Color of Money’ back in 2014 and re-released it in 2017 to engrain the culture of inclusion with his Legacy Company. https://www.duplicateblog.com/blog/2017/9/11/the-color-of-money  
   
   Is this previous scenario even possible in the era of “Black Lives Matter”?  The answer obviously is:  YES! 

2. Could it be that the FTC, in its grave over reach and disavowing of President Trump’s Executive order:  https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/president-donald-j-trump-combating-bureaucratic-abuse-holding-federal-agencies-accountable  ignored a previous ruling that identified assets beyond net gains couldn’t be frozen, and was decided in the Seventh District in Credit Bureau v. FTC, over a year ago, yet bulldozed into the Ninth Circuit for this case by design? 

3. Could it be the reason that the FTC wanted to make an example of the visibly Black CEO?  They tried to denigrate him in that 2002 BigSmart Case, where he was a Top Distributor, with no ownership, had resigned from the company prior and was exonerated and found guilty of no wrong doing.  Yet, the FTC started hounding him 90 days later:  (Guilty until proven innocent is their credo).  

4. Could it be that the FTC acted in a discriminatory manner against the entire MLM industry, and racially targeted a small town muliti-racial boy from Kentucky:   And that their single-handed focus was to smear him?  MLM is an industry where there is equal opportunity for minorities: TRUE EQUALITY in the Marketplace like none other.  

5. Could it be that the FTC is just acting inhumanely, by cutting off all business and personal assets for 6 months, while the Receiver has looted hundreds of thousands of dollars of revenues earned by the sale of actual great products?  Then, compounding these actions, haven’t budged to any degree, even in the middle of the worst pandemic and economic downturn in recent history and  is just plain cruel. 

6. Could it be that this whole saga precipitated from a personal vendetta by Luke Curry (an ex-SBH Staff Member), a married man and father of three, who was having an affair with Rylie Qualls, Executive Secretary for Jay Noland?  This indiscretion was a violation of SBH Corporate Policy, Qualls was fired, and Curry was demoted and signed a disciplinary agreement that strictly limited his activities. Curry could not abide by the agreement he made, so he quit.  Curry then corralled his friends to file the consumer complaints and false complaints—on which the FTC acted upon.  The FTC, in other words, is helping Luke Curry exact revenge for getting caught committing adultery.   

7. Could it be that they were just plain flat biased and acting in a discriminatory fashion from the beginning? The ‘sardonicism is implicit throughout and underscores its bias.’  the Defendants’ attorneys write. 

If this were a multiple choice test question, I would choose:  All of the above!   

According to the Defendants’ attorney: “This slow turning of the heat to boil the frog has been working, but that does not mean as the Supreme Court in Liu-vs SEC ruled, that it is right and that this court should allow itself to be seethed because of the FTC’s churning.  Having the receiver designate Enhanced Capital Funding as a Receivership Entity is exactly consistent with the FTC’s back room machinations. This court, under Liu, must not countenance and succumb to this legerdemain.” 

A request for an oral hearing has been requested.  This is more than a case about MLM.  This is about America, Free Enterprise, and Equality at the core.  Surely, truth will prevail. There must be more to come…. (See attachment for the complete June 22, 2020 Motion) 

I asked someone to make an image for me that tells the story and here’s what they came up with: