BUDGET BLINDS, LLC'S ASSURANCE 9 POACHING PROVISIONS OF DISCONTINUANCE

Similar documents
8 IN RE: FRANCHISE NO POACHING NO. 9 PROVISIONS IHOP FRANCHISOR LLC 10 ASSURANCE OF DISCONTINUANCE 11 I. PARTIES

STATE OF WASHINGTON KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT. NO. 'zo't~% 4. The State of Washington (State), by and through its attorneys, Robert W.

SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT NO.

8 No. IN RE: FRANCHISE NO POACHING 9 PROVISIONS WINGSTOP RESTAURANTS INC. ASSURANCE OF DISCONTINUANCE 10

STATE OF WASHINGTON KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT NO. General (the Attorney General ), and Eric S. Newman, Assistant Attorney General, files this

8 IN RE: FRANCHISE NO POACHING Wei PROVISIONS 9 LITTLE CAESAR ENTERPRISES, 10 INC. ASSURANCE OF DISCONTINUANCE 11 I. PARTIES

STATE OF WASHINGTON KING COUNT' SUPERIOR COURT r? NO. 5 5Z - 4 5LA. 1. t3 t 2- r b I i tala' 5. L_ L-C- QUIZ HOLDINGS, LLC ASSURANCE OF DISCONTINUANCE

20 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. GNC is a global specialty retailer of health, wellness and

STATE OF WASHINGTON KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT NO. General (the Attorney General ), and Eric S. Newman, Assistant Attorney General, files this

L PARTIES. Pizza LLC ("Domino's") and other quick service restaurant franchisors relating to certain

I. PARTIES. dba Denny's, relating to certain provisions utilized in its franchise agreements.

on,~3p TIN STATE OF WASHINGTON KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT NO, The State of Washington, by and through its attorneys, Robert W. Ferguson, Attorney

8 IN RE: FRANCHISE NO 9 POACHING PROVISIONS ANYTIME FITNESS, LLC 10 ASSURANCE OF DISCONTINUANCE 11

STATE OF WASHINGTON DING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT IN RE: FRANCHISE NO POACHING I NO. PROVISIONS A&W RESTAURANTS, INC. ASSURANCE OF DISCONTINUANCE

8 IN RE: FRANCHISE NO POACHING NO. 9 PROVISIONS BURGER KING CORPORATION 10 ASSURANCE OF DISCONTINUANCE 11 I. PARTIES

PROVISIONS JAMBA JUICE COMPANY'S ASSURANCE OF 14 DISCONTINUANCE. Assurance of Discontinuance ("AOD") pursuant RCW

NO. 9 PIZZA HUT, LLC ASSURANCE OF DISCONTINUANCE 10. Assurance of Discontinuance ("AOD") pursuant RCW

NO. VALVOLINE INSTANT OIL 10 CHANGE FRANCHISING, INC. ASSURANCE OF 11 DISCONTINUANCE

The State of Washington, by and through its attorneys, Robert W. Ferguson, Attorney

9 IN RE: FRANCHISE NO POACHING NO.'~ PROVISIONS 10 MENCHIE'S GROUP, INC. (MENCHIE'S GROUP, INC.)

Assurance of Discontinuance ("AOD") pursuant to RCW I. PARTIES

STATE OF WASHINGTON KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT DISCONTINUANCE V.

STATE OF WASHINGTON, KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT. Defendants.

NO Attorney for Judgment Creditor: Audrey Udashen 23 Assistant Attorney General

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KING

STATE OF FLORIDA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS ASSURANCE OF VO LUNT ARY COMPLIANCE

Office of the Attorney General State of Florida Department of Legal Affairs

~/

~/

*CLMNT_IDNO* - UAA - <<SequenceNo>>

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. An Agreement among the Offices of the Attorneys General of the States and

~/

Practices Act", Florida Statutes (2010), the STATE OF FLORIDA, OFFICE OF THE

INDEPENDENT SALES AGENCY TERMS AND CONDITIONS

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOSHIBA ENTITIES AND THE STATE OF ILLINOIS REGARDING CRT ANTITRUST LITIGATION

Case 1:10-cv JLT Document 1 Filed 01/22/2010 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

~/

Applicant Co Applicant. Address. City State Zip. Home Phone# Cell Phone# Address Birth Date DL# SS# Sponsor Name

STATE OF FLORIDA, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS ASSURANCE OF VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE

STATE OF FLORIDA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS. Respondents. I ASSURANCE OF VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE

STATE OF FLORIDA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS ASSURANCE OF VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE

STATE OF WASHINGTON KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT

NOTICE OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AND FINAL APPROVAL HEARING YOUR ESTIMATED PAYMENT INFORMATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION

Pursuant to the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act, Chapter. 501, Part II, Florida Statutes (2016), the STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KING. DISCONTINUANCE WEIDNER PROPERTY MANAGEMENT LLC, Defendant.

GENERAL APPLICATION AND AGREEMENT OF INDEMNITY CONTRACTORS FORM

STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL ASSURANCE OF VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE

~/

Case 2:07-cv RAJ Document 87 Filed 03/27/2009 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

NOTICE OF PROPOSED CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT. Berta Martin Del Campo v. Hometown Buffet, Inc., et al.

~/

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS ASSURANCE OF VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE

~/

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO. Plaintiffs, )

~/

STATE OF FLORIDA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS ASSURANCE OF VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE

STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS ASSURANCE OF VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE

Case BLS Doc 134 Filed 05/25/18 Page 1 of 19 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

!! 1 Page! 2014 PEODepot. All rights reserved. PEODepot and peodepot.com are trademarks of PEODepot. INITIAL! BROKER AGREEMENT

STATE OF FLORIDA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS RESPONDENTS.

Non-Circumvention, Non Disclosure & Working Agreement / Irrevocable Master Fee Protection Agreement Page 1 of 10

Case 1:11-cv NLH -AMD Document 61 Filed 01/24/13 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 211 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

Material Applicator. BASF Corporation Wall Systems Information Form

NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE LLC LETTER OF ACCEPTANCE, WAIVER, AND CONSENT NO

Case 1:08-cv FAM Document 52 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/10/2008 Page 1 of 7

OUR FRANCHISE CLIENTS AND FRIENDS GRAY PLANT MOOTY S FRANCHISE AND DISTRIBUTION PRACTICE GROUP. Quentin R. Wittrock, Editor of The GPMemorandum

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

TERMS OF USE AGREEMENT

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

ONTARIO GASOLINE CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. Made on June 4, Between JAMES LORIMER. (the "Plaintiff. and

STATE OF FLORIDA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS

Case 1:13-cv GJQ Doc #12 Filed 04/16/14 Page 1 of 7 Page ID#34 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Your legal rights may be affected even if you do not act. Please read this Notice carefully. YOUR RIGHTS AND CHOICES

GENERAL APPLICATION AND AGREEMENT OF INDEMNITY CONTRACTORS FORM

STREETBLAST MEDIA, LLC. PO BOX 176 FAIRDALE, KENTUCKY 40118

STATE OF FLORIDA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS ASSURANCE OF VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

PURSUANT to the provisions of Chapter 501, Part II, Florida Statutes, Florida's

Page 1 USER AGREEMENT

NON-EXCLUSIVE LICENSE FOR USE OF SCHOOL WORDMARKS AND LOGOS

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE COMPLAINT

STATE OF FLORIDA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS ASSURANCE OF VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE

STATE OF FLORIDA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS ASSURANCE OF VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE

SERVICE REFERRAL AGREEMENT

[CONSULTING AGREEMENT/INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR AGREEMENT]

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

AMENDED CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND GENERAL RELEASE. This Amended Class Action Settlement Agreement and General Release ( Settlement

Case 2:14-cv JLR Document 24 Filed 08/31/15 Page 1 of 44 THE HONORABLE JAMES L. ROBART 2

Case 2:06-cv RSM Document 30 Filed 05/04/2006 Page 1 of 6

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Your legal rights are affected whether you act or don t act. Please read this Notice carefully.

If You Are A Third-Party Payor that Paid or Reimbursed for All or Part of the Cost of Ovcon 35, A Summary of Your Rights and Choices:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY NOTICE OF CLASS ACTION AND PROPOSED SETTLEMENT

~/

AWS Certification Program Agreement

Connecticut Multiple Listing Service, Inc.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA105 FERC 61,307 FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

Transcription:

1 2 3 4 5 6 STATE OF WASHINGTON KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT ~- ' ~ 8 IN RE: FRANCHISE NO ASSURANCE 9 POACHING PROVISIONS OF DISCONTINUANCE 10 The State of Washington (State), by and through its attorneys, Robert W. Ferguson, Attorney General, and Rahul Rao, Assistant Attorney General, files this Assurance of Discontinuance (AOD) pursuant RCW 19.86.100. 15 I. PARTIES 16 1.1 In January 2018, the Attorney General initiated the "In re Franchise No 17 Poaching Provisions Investigation," which included investigation of the hiring practices of 18 franchisors and franchisees in the State of Washington, including Budget Blinds, LLC. 19 1.2 Budget Blinds, LLC ("Budget Blinds") is a California limited liability company 20 with its principal office or place of business in Irvine, California. Budget Blinds is in the 21 business of franchising businesses that provide window coverings under the "Budget Blinds " 22 trademark. 23 1.3 Budget Blinds includes its directors, officers, managers, agents acting within the 24 scope of their agency, and employees as well as its successors and assigns, controlled 25 subsidiaries, divisions, groups, affiliates, partnerships, and joint ventures. Budget Blinds does 26 not include independent franchise operators. BUDGET BLINDS, LLC' S Seattle, WA 981044188 (206) 464-7744

1 I1. INVESTIGATION 2 2.1 Budget Blinds currently has approximately 40 independently owned and 3 operated franchise locations in Washington. No locations are owned or operated by Budget 4 Blinds. 5 2.2 Prior to Q1 2018, Budget Blinds included language in paragraph 8.8(c)(ii) of its 6 franchise agreement that restricted a franchisee's post-termination ability to solicit or hire 7 workers from another franchisee or Budget Blinds (the "8.8(c)(ii) provision"), Specifically, the 8 8.8(c)(ii) provision stated: 9 8.8(c) For a continuously uninterrupted period of two years, beginning with the "beginning date" [expiration, termination or transfer] specified below, 10 Franchisee will not, directly or indirectly, for itself, or through, on behalf of or in conjunction with any other person: (ii) Employ, or seek to employ, any person who is at that time, or has been within the preceding six months, employed by Franchisor or by any other franchisee or developer of Franchisor, or otherwise directly or indirectly induce those people to leave their employment, except as permitted under any existing franchise agreement between Franchisor and 15 Franchisee. 16 In Q1 2018, Budget Blinds removed this provision from its standard franchise agreement 17 several months before the Washington Attorney General's investigation into Budget Blinds' 18 hiring practices. 19 2.3 The Attorney General asserts that the foregoing contract language constitutes a 20 contract, combination, or conspiracy in restraint of trade in violation of the Consumer 21 Protection Act, RCW 19.86.030. 22 2.4 Budget Blinds expressly denies that the contract provision described above 23 constitutes a contract, combination, or conspiracy in restraint of trade in violation of the 24 Consumer Protection Act, RCW 19.86.030, or any other law, and expressly denies it has 25 engaged in any conduct that constitutes a contract, combination, or conspiracy in restraint of 26 trade. Budget Blinds believes that the contract provision was adopted to encourage franchisees 2

1 to make the investments necessary to develop a well-trained, high quality, and stable 2 workforce in their locations, which in turn strengthened Budget Blinds' brand and individual 3 Budget Blinds locations' ability to compete against other branded companies, among other 4 reasons. Budget Blinds enters into this AOD to formalize its existing practice and accelerate 5 removal of the provision from its Washington franchise agreements and avoid protracted and 6 expensive litigation that could be brought by the State if it does not enter into this AOD. 7 Pursuant to RCW 19.86.100, neither the existence of this AOD nor any of its terms shall be 8 construed as an admission of law or fact, or any liability, misconduct, or wrongdoing on the 9 part of Budget Blinds. 10 III. 3.1 Subject to the paragraphs above, Budget Blinds agrees: 3.1.1. As of Q1 2018, it removed the 8.8(c)(ii) provision from its current standard franchise agreement and will no longer include 8.8(c)(ii) or other similar provisions that purport to restrict a franchisee's ability to solicit or hire employees from Budget Blinds or 15 other franchisees in any future franchise agreement nationwide; 16 3.1.2. As in the past, it will not enforce the 8.8(c)(ii) provision in any of its 17 existing franchise agreements, and will not seek to intervene or defend in any way the legality 18 of the 8.8(c)(ii) provision in any litigation in which a franchisee may claim third-party 19 beneficiary status rights to enforce the 8.8(c)(ii) provision in an existing Budget Blinds 20 franchise agreement; 21 3.1.3. Within days after the entry of this AOD, it will make all of its 22 franchisees aware of the entry of this AOD and make a copy available if requested; 23 3.1.4. It will notify the Attorney General's Office if it learns of any effort by a 24 Washington Budget Blinds franchisee to enforce paragraph 8.8(c)(ii). 25 3.2 Within 90 days of entry of this AOD, Budget Blinds will endeavor to amend all 26 franchise agreements with Washington Budget Blinds franchisees to remove the 8.8(c)(ii) 3- (206) 464-7744

rx 1 provision in its existing franchise agreement. However, for the avoidance of doubt, Budget 2 Blinds is under no obligation to offer its franchisees any consideration, monetary or otherwise, 3 in order to induce them to sign the proposed amendment, nor will Budget Blinds be required to 4 take, or threaten to take, any adverse action against any such franchisees if they refuse to do so. 5 If any Washington franchise owner declines to amend its franchise agreement within 7 days 6 prior to the 90-day deadline, Budget Blinds shall provide the name and address of any such 7 franchise owner to the Office of the Attorney General. A decision by a Budget Blinds 8 franchisee not to amend its franchise agreement, or not to do so within 90 days of this AOD, 9 shall not mean that Budget Blinds has not complied with its obligations under this AOD. This 10 provision shall be deemed satisfied with regard to each Washington Budget Blinds franchisee by either the amendment of such franchisee's franchise agreement(s) to remove the 8.8(c)(ii) provision or by Budget Blinds providing the name and address of such franchisee to the Office of the Attorney General. 3.3 As of Q1 2018 and going forward, Budget Blinds will not include the 8.8(c)(ii) 15 provision in its franchise agreement for all franchisees nationwide, including for (a) new 16 franchisees signing franchise agreements for the first time after the date of this AOD, (b) 17 existing franchisees whose franchise agreements have expired and/or are otherwise subject to 18 renewal, rebuild or relocation, and (c) franchisees who are acquiring a Budget Blinds business 19 or another franchisee's business (i.e., assignment) assuming they sign a new franchise 20 agreement as part of the transaction. 21 3.4 Within 30 days of the conclusion of all time periods referenced in this section 22 III, Budget Blinds will submit a declaration to the Attorney General's Office signed under 23 penalty of perjury stating that it has complied with all provisions of this AOD or, if 24 circumstances beyond Budget Blinds' control prevent compliance with any paragraph within 25 the specified time frame, Budget Blinds will describe its efforts to satisfy the paragraph's 26 requirements and the relevant extenuating circumstances., 4 _

I IV. ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS 2 4.1 This AOD is binding on, and applies to Budget Blinds, including each of its 3 respective directors, officers, managers, agents acting within the scope of their agency, and 4 employees, as well as their respective successors and assigns, controlled subsidiaries, 5 divisions, groups, affiliates, partnerships, and joint ventures, or other entities through which 6 Budget Blinds may now or hereafter act with respect to the conduct alleged in this AOD. 7 4.2 This is a voluntary agreement and it shall not be construed as an admission of g any law, fact, liability, misconduct, evidence of violation or wrongdoing on the part of Budget 9 Blinds. By entering into this AOD, Budget Blinds does not agree or concede that the claims, 10 allegations and/or causes of action which were threatened by and/or could have been asserted by and/or could have been asserted by the Attorney General have any merit and Budget Blinds expressly denies the existence of any facts pertaining to Budget Blinds that could support any such claims, allegations, and/or causes of action. However, proof of Budget Blinds' attempt to enforce the 8.8(c)(ii) provision in Washington after the date of this AOD shall be prima facie 15 evidence of a violation of RCW 19.86.030, thereby placing upon the violator the burden of 16 defending against imposition by the Court of injunctions, restitution, costs and reasonable 17 attorney's fees, and civil penalties of up to $2,000.00 per violation. 18 4.3 Budget Blinds will not, nor will it authorize any of its officers, employees, 19 representatives, or agents to state or otherwise contend that the State of Washington or the 20 Attorney General has approved of, or has otherwise sanctioned, the language described in 21 paragraph 2.2 above with respect to the 8.8(c)(ii) provision in Budget Blinds' franchise 22 agreement. 23 4.4 Budget Blinds' compliance with this AOD resolves all issues raised by the State of 24 Washington and the of the Attorney General's Office under the Consumer 25 Protection Act and any other statutes relating to the acts set forth in paragraph 2.2 2.4 above. 26 1 Subject to paragraph 4.2, the State of Washington and the of the Attorney $ _

General's Office shall not file suit or take any further investigative or enforcement action against 21 3 4 5 Budget Blinds with respect to the acts set forth above that occurred before the date of entry of this AOD, or against independent Budget Blinds franchisees in Washington who agree to the amendment described in paragraph 3.2 above within 90 days of the entry of this AOD with respect to acts that occurred before the date of such amendment. 6 7 APPROVED ON this day of, 2018. 8 9 10 JUDGE/COURT COMISSIONER 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 BUDGET BLINDS, LLCS _ 6 (206) 464-7744

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Presented by: ROBERT W. FERGUSON Attorney General RAHUL RAO (WSB No-53375) Assistant Attorney General Attorneys for State of Washington Office of the Attorney General Seattle, WA 98104 Agreed to and approved for entry by: Bt 'T BLI S. L Daniel J. Oates, WSB No. 39334 Budget Blinds, LLC MILLER NASH GRAHAM & DUNN LLP 2801 Alaskan Way, Suite 300 By: Jennie Amante Seattle, WA 981 Tel. (206) 777-7537 Its: Executive VP and General Counsel Fax (206) 340-9599 Dan.Oates((i~ii3 illeriaasll.eolar and Michael R. Gray, MN No. 175602 GRAY PLANT MOOTY MOOTY & BENNETT PA 80 South Eighth Street, Suite 500 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Tel. (6) 632-3078 Fax(6)632-4078 inikecarav nan,omlawxoni Attorneys for Budget Blinds, LLC I GP:4822-1684-2370 v2 1 BUDGET BLINDS, LLC' S _7-