PUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22-2078

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

KRISTY ROSS, individually, and as officer of Innovative Marketing, Inc.,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Richard D. Bennett, Senior District Judge. (1:08-cv-03233-RDB)

Argued: May 3, 2023 Decided: July 19, 2023

Before DIAZ, Chief Judge, RUSHING, Circuit Judge, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by published opinion. Senior Judge Floyd wrote the opinion in which Chief Judge Diaz and Judge Rushing joined.

ARGUED: Robert P. Greenspoon, DUNLAP, BENNETT & LUDWIG, Chicago, Illinois, for Appellant. Matthew Michael Hoffman, FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. ON BRIEF: William W. Flachsbart, DUNLAP, BENNETT & LUDWIG, Chicago, Illinois, for Appellant. Anisha S. Dasgupta, General Counsel, Joel Marcus, Deputy General Counsel, Matthew M. Hoffman, Miriam R. Lederer, FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. USCA4 Appeal: 22-2078 Doc: 41 Filed: 07/19/2023 Pg: 2 of 16

FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge:

Defendant-Appellant Kristy Ross victimized over a million Americans by

furthering a country-wide “scareware” scam that tricked innocent computer users into

paying for unnecessary software to remedy entirely fabricated issues purported to plague

their devices. An apparent fugitive—having sought for years to evade paying even a cent

of the $163,167,539.95 in restitution ordered for her role in the scheme—Ross now seeks

vacatur of that aging monetary judgment. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.

I.

In the early 2000s, Ross was a vice president of Innovative Marketing, Inc.—a

company perpetrating a country-wide “scareware” scam that tricked more than one million

Americans into purchasing unnecessary software to fix computer issues that did not exist.

Ross helped to develop software advertisements and pop-ups that falsely represented to

viewers that their computers were infected by malicious software and viruses, contained

illegal pornography, or were about to suffer critical system failures. The advertisements

offered remedial software (for purchase) for the fraudulently represented issues. Costs of

the remedial software ranged anywhere from $30 to $100. Once purchased by desperate

device owners, not only did the software do nothing to fix the purported issues—those

issues never existed—but reputable computer-security vendors considered the fraudsters’

software to itself be harmful to purchasers’ devices. In the course of the scam, Ross and

her co-conspirators fraudulently accumulated more than $160 million. Reaping the fruits

of her duplicitous scheme, Ross enjoyed a lavish life with scam proceeds, frequenting Four

2 USCA4 Appeal: 22-2078 Doc: 41 Filed: 07/19/2023 Pg: 3 of 16

Seasons resorts abroad and shopping at luxury retailers.

In 2008, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) sued Ross, alleging that the

scareware scam violated Section 5(a) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (“FTC Act”),

15 U.S.C. § 45(a), which prohibits unfair or deceptive practices in or affecting commerce. 1

The FTC specifically sought relief via the FTC Act’s injunctive provision, Section

Click Here to Read the rest of this document