Opinion ID: 790487
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Common Factual Background

Text: 2 The events leading to these two appeals can be traced to January 9, 2003, when Plaintiff-Appellee Federal Trade Commission (FTC) filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas. The complaint alleged that a variety of corporations and individuals, led by Kyle Kimoto and his primary operating company, Assail Inc. (Assail) (collectively the defendants), engaged in a telemarketing scheme in violation of § 5(a) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (FTCA), 15 U.S.C. § 45(a), and the FTC's Telemarketing Sales Rule, 16 C.F.R. § 310.1-.9. 1 3 At the FTC's insistence, on the day the complaint was filed, the court issued an ex parte temporary restraining order barring the defendants from continuing their scheme and freezing their assets. The order named certain specific defendants, but it also made clear that the provisions of this Order shall be binding upon the defendants and upon their . . . attorneys . . . and all other persons or entities in active concert or participation with [the defendants] who receive actual notice of this Order .... The court also appointed Appellee Robb Evans & Associates, LLC (REA) as receiver. On February 4, 2003, the district court issued a preliminary injunction that essentially restated the terms of the temporary restraining order. 4