- Joined
- Jan 7, 2025
- Messages
- 10
- Thread Author
- #1
Motion
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION FOR EMERGENCY INJUNCTION
The Plaintiff respectfully requests that the court order the Department of Commerce to suspend any ongoing mystery box auctions and cease to approve any new mystery box auctions until the conclusion of this case.
The question is undecided on if the DOC is allowing fraudulent mystery box auctions and if DOC employees are engaging in unlawful activities as it relates to these auctions. This emergency injunction will prevent any potential harm caused if these arguments are indeed true.
Case Filing
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION
RaiTheGuy (represented by Justice Compass Law Firm)
Plaintiff
v.
Department of Commerce
Defendant
COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:
On March 24, 2025 at 2:47 PM MST, an auction was posted by lukeyyy_MC with the title “Filthy Rich Mystery Box”. Like any reasonable person, the plaintiff saw the title and the starting bid amount and thought this could be his chance to break through and realize financial stability or come into items of high value. When the plaintiff saw a message from the Department of Commerce Secretary stating that he wished he could have participated, followed by a DOC employee expressing interest in winning the box, the plaintiff knew that he had to win. Any reasonable person would have thought that if members of the DOC thought that the box was valuable, then it surely was, especially given the fact that DOC has to look within the contents and approve the box. What happened after the plaintiff won was, to say the least, a sad mark on not only himself but on the DOC as well. The starting bid alone was worth 6,441.59% of the contents, and the plaintiff’s winning bid was worth 8,417.15% of the contents value. The DOC not only approved the auction, but assisted in driving up the price. This spits in the face of the law, the DOC’s own policy, and every consumer that uses the marketplace.
I. PARTIES
1. RaiTheGuy (Plaintiff)2. Department of Commerce (Defendant)
II. FACTS
1. LukeyyyMC_ posted the Filthy Rich Mystery Box for auction for a starting bid of $50,000. (P-001)2. The items listed in P-009 are the items that were a part of the mystery box.
2. RaiTheGuy wins the auction for a price of $65,100. (P-006)
3. RaiTheGuy paid for and received the mystery box from LukeyyyMC_. (P-007)
4. Both .Lucky_waq and YeetPappa knew the contents of the mystery box. (P-002)
5. The Department of Commerce approved the auction for posting. (P-004 & P-005)
6. According to the Consumer Price Index published by the Department of Commerce, the approximate value of the box between 2024 and 2025 is $764.34 (P-009).
7. Some items in the mystery box have no record in the CPI in 2024 and 2025 (P-009, P-010 through P-013)
8. The Secretary of Commerce commented “kinda sad I can’t bid on these” in the auction chat. (P-002)
9. DOC employee .Lucky_waq commented “I WAN5 THIS” (P-002)
10. The Department of Commerce has a policy that states among other items: “A mystery box may not be auctioned off without receiving a screenshot of its contents in order to prevent auctioneer fraud”. (P-003)
III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. The Department of Commerce did not follow through on their own written policy. Evidence shows that the Department approves mystery box auctions to prevent auctioneer fraud. This policy requires auctioneers to submit the contents of the box for approval. The only way the Department can truly know whether or not a potential auction can be fraudulent is if they know the starting bid amount and the approximate value of the contents within. Furthermore, the policy does not specify that the Department shall ONLY approve the contents, so a reasonable person will read this and assume that the department will approve the whole auction, this MUST include the starting bid amount as well. Additionally, the employees of the Department commented on the auction without a bid, violating Auction Rules of holding general conversation within a bid channel.2. The Department of Commerce violated the Commercial Standards Act by not doing their duty under Section 4, subsection 5 “The Department of Commerce is charged with investigating commerce-related white-collar crimes.” By not doing their duty under the law, they allowed a mystery box to filter through their system and fraud the plaintiff out of $65,100.
3. By commenting on their desire to win or participate in the auction, the Department violated Section 8 of the Commercial Standards Act by participating in Third-Party Misrepresentation. The Department knew the contents of the box and showed displeasure at not being able to participate, recklessly aiding the auctioneer by driving the price up indirectly. When people see that the person who approves the auction wants to bid on an item, they will think it is worth more than the starting bid.
IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:1. $65,100 in Compensatory Damages - Restoration of price paid for mystery box.
2. $20,000 in Punitive Damages - For the outrageous practice of allowing fraudulent auctions and for breaking the law they are to uphold.
3. $25,530 in Legal Fees - 30% of the total monetary damages.
4. The Department of Commerce ceases the allowance of mystery boxes in the marketplace until they implement a policy that protects consumers from fraud that is approved by this court.
Witness List:
lukeyyyMC_ - AuctioneerYeetPappa - DOC Secretary
.Lucky_waq - DOC Employee
Evidence:
Requests for Information:
The plaintiff requests the following information:1. The ticket created by lukeyyMC_ for the mystery box auction, done via FOI request to the DOJ.
2. All private communication between DOC employees and lukeyyMC_ that mention or relates to “mystery box”.
3. Any documentation that the DOC has on mystery box auction rules and methodology to determine if a mystery box should not be approved.
By making this submission, I agree I understand the penalties of lying in court and the fact that I am subject to perjury should I knowingly make a false statement in court. Any requests about my qualifications can be verified by the Department of Education.
DATED: This 26 day of March 2025.