Quest Q40 Metal Detector

[GB_Amateur]

Sounds like one more black eye for a company that has earned more than its share.

 

[Rick K - First Member]

I had seen somewhere that there was another court action brought against them by First Texas, but I haven’t been able to find the filing.

Update:  Yes there is another action pending, but the documents are only available with subscription.

https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/23776798/First_Texas_Products,_LLC_et_al_v_Deteknix_Inc_et_al

[Rick K - First Member]

phrunt,

Your reference is to a judgement FT won against Chinese companies and US sellers, Judgement in a US court does nothing directly to shut down operations in China.  The US partner in distributing this crap was shut down and reached an agreement  with First Texas.

This judgement makes it easy for First Texas to jump on anyone in the US who attempts to distribute or sell these fakes.  Anyone in the US who does so would get hit with a fast “takedown” letter for online stuff and likely a “cease and desist” letter along with a demand for damages.

Kingdetector is obviously a Chinese outfit and out of reach of US enforcement.

 

The Deteknics case is different.  They set up in California and tried to run a business in the US which sold machines which they later admitted, in response to a lawsuit by First Texas, were in fact pirate detectors.  They settled that lawsuit and presumably agreed to perform certain obligations in future in order to induce First Texas to settle.  

I have no information on what is alleged in this later suit, but for First Texas to go to the trouble and cost of filing a lawsuit, it must have been something which they considered significant. I have no data on it, but there is a pretty good clue in the docket information

Nature of Suit	190 Contract - Other Contract
Cause	28:1332 Diversity-Other Contract

The 28:1332 is a reference to “Diversity Breach of Contract”.  when a party on one state alleges breach of contract by a party in another state, this doctrine in Federal Law allows them to go to Federal court seeking a remedy. I’m just speculating here, but we know that the settlement of the first lawsuit against Deteknics was by way of an agreement between the parties - an agreement likely including Deteknics agreeing to specific things like paying damages and court costs , or agreeing  to carry out - or to desist from carrying out specific actions,. An agreement like this is a contract.  Failure to pay the damages or carry out the “specific performace” agreed to would constitute breach of contract.

if the information earlier in this thread attributed to Sven is correct, it may have been enough to cause  “Jason Deng” - (whose actual name is likely Mao Quang Deng - per the court documents) to leave the US.  Who knows?