United States Postal Service(TM) 


 In the Matter of the Complaint Against

 THE HEALTH ENERGETIC CORP.
 1011 Brioso Drive
 at Costa Mesa, CA 92627-4501

 P.S. Docket No. 16/50;  
 
 08/20/84
 
 Cohen, James A.  

 APPEARANCE FOR COMPLAINANT:
 HildaRosenberg, Esq.
 Consumer Protection Division
 Law Department
 United States Postal Service
 Washington, DC 20260-1112

 APPEARANCE FOR RESPONDENT:
 Charles F. Abbott, Esq.
 2230 No. University Parkway Bldg. 7,
 Suite G Provo, UT 84604-1509

POSTAL SERVICE DECISION

ON BREACH OF CONSENT AGREEMENT

On July 24, 1984, Complainant filed a Petition for Orders Based on Breach of Consent Agreement alleging that Respondent has breached the terms of a Consent Agreement executed on April 15, 1983, by Leo Daboub on behalf of the captioned Respondent. Complainant contends that Respondent has breached the terms of the Consent Agreement by resuming the activities which it agreed in the Consent Agreement to discontinue. The name and address which Complainant alleges Respondent uses in conducting the resumed activity and against which it seeks the issuance of orders is: The Health Energetic Corp., 1012 Brioso Drive, #103, Costa Mesa, California 92627-4544.

In accordance with Paragraph 9(d) of the Consent Agreement, Complainant notified Respondent's counsel that a Petition for Breach of Consent Agreement was going to be filed. At Respondent's request, a telephone conference was held on July 24, 1984, with counsel for both parties. Argument was presented on the issues raised by the Petition (See Memo. of Telephone Conf., July 25, 1984).

On July 25, 1984, the interim detention order authorized in Paragraph 9(b) of the Consent Agreement was issued against The Health Energetic Corp., Dept. C-476, 1012 Brioso Drive, #103, Costa Mesa, California 92627-4544. The interim detention order granted Respondent a period of ten days in which to file a reply to the Petition. No reply has been filed by Respondent. In the absence of a reply, the allegations of the Petition are deemed to be admitted. These allegations, which are supported by the attachments to the Petition, make a prima facie showing that Respondent has breached the terms of the Consent Agreement in the manner alleged in the Petition.

Accordingly, pursuant to the terms of the Consent Agreement, an Order under 39 U.S.C. § 3005 is being issued with this Decision.