__________________________________________ 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 1/30/2023 | Document No. 606800 | PAGE Page 1 of 2 * PUBLIC *; 

PUBLIC 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES 

) 

In the Matter of ) 

) 

Intuit, Inc., ) Docket No. 9408

 a corporation, ) 

) 

Respondent. ) 

__________________________________________) 

ORDER ON JOINT MOTION TO CONDUCT 

EVIDENTIARY HEARING IN PERSON 

On January 24, 2023, Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) Complaint Counsel and 

Respondent Intuit, Inc. filed a joint motion requesting that the evidentiary hearing in this matter, 

scheduled to begin on March 27, 2023, be conducted live and in person, rather than by video 

conference (“Joint Motion”). 

The federal government is currently under a national health emergency related to the 

COVID-19 pandemic. On February 18, 2022, the President of the United States issued an 

executive proclamation declaring: “The COVID-19 pandemic continues to cause significant risk 

to the public health and safety of the Nation” and finding that the initial pandemic emergency 

declaration made on March 13, 2020 “must continue in effect . . . .” Continuation of the National 

Emergency Concerning the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (Covid-19) Pandemic, 87 Fed. Reg. 10289 

(Feb. 18, 2022). In addition, on January 11, 2023, the Secretary of the United States Department 

of Health and Human Services renewed the numerous prior determinations, going back to 

January 20, 2020, that “a public health emergency exists . . . nationwide.” 

https://aspr.hhs.gov/legal/PHE/Pages/covid19-11Jan23.aspx. Moreover, at the FTC, numerous 

employees remain under extended telework agreements. 

The Joint Motion does not mention any of the foregoing constraints. The parties contend 

only that “an in-person trial will allow the Court to best assess the credibility of th[e] witnesses” 

and will “free[] up the parties to focus on their respective arguments instead of the logistics of 

video.” These assertions are unsupported and are rejected. First, during the period that the abovereferenced national emergency has been in effect, two evidentiary hearings have been conducted 

by video conference and initial decisions were subsequently issued. In both cases, video 

testimony readily enabled the presiding Administrative Law Judge to make credibility 

determinations. The parties fail to explain how live testimony is so markedly superior for 

assessing credibility as to override pandemic health concerns. Second, regarding logistics, both 

of the prior video trials proceeded smoothly with a minimum of disruptions. The parties fail to 
 

 

 

 

 

paste FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION | OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY | FILED 1/30/2023 | Document No. 606800 | PAGE Page 2 of 2 * PUBLIC *; 

PUBLIC 

support the assertion that presenting witness testimony by remote video will present more 

logistical issues than presenting witness testimony live. In fact, the logistics of bringing 

numerous witnesses and lawyers, as well as members of the press and the public, into the FTC 

building to attend a live evidentiary hearing were complex and burdensome prior to the 

pandemic. These have only increased with the addition of necessary pandemic precautions. It is 

also significant that many more members of the press and public can access the hearing, via 

telephone connection, than could attend an in-person hearing at the FTC building. 

Furthermore, given pandemic work schedules and related complications, it is not 

apparent that the FTC is presently capable of providing the necessary courtroom security and 

related personnel to support conducting in-person proceedings. In this regard, it is noteworthy 

that, since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Commission’s proceedings, including 

appellate oral arguments, and indeed, the hearing on Complaint Counsel’s pending Motion for 

Summary Decision in the instant case, have been conducted through video conference. 

For all the foregoing reasons, the Joint Motion is DENIED. 

ORDERED: 

D. Michael Chappell 

Chief Administrative Law Judge 

Date: January 30, 2023 

2