Were there any current litigation cases involving Focalpoint Coaching at the time this FDD was written?
Focalpoint_Coaching Franchise · 2025 FDDAnswer from 2025 FDD Document
[Item 3: Litigation]
Item 3
LITIGATION
Current Litigation:
None.
Concluded Litigation:
FocalPoint International, Inc. v. Dom Rubino Consulting Services Inc. and BizStratPlan, Inc., Case Number: 18-cv-00236-APG-PAL; United States District Court, District of Nevada; Date Filed: February 8, 2018; Dom Rubino Consulting Services Inc. and BizStratPlan, Inc. v. FocalPoint International, Inc., Case Number: No. S182802, Vancouver Registry; Supreme Court of British Columbia, Canada; Date Filed: February 15, 2018.
These are related actions. For the US/Nevada matter, on February 8, 2018, FocalPoint International filed a lawsuit against Dom Rubino Consulting Services Inc. and BizStratPlan, Inc. ("Defendants") seeking declaratory relief related to a Consulting Agreement, a Loan Agreement, and a Cash Advance Agreement. The claims related to alleged outstanding amounts that Defendants claims were owed. On May 22, 2018, Defendants filed counterclaims alleging breach of those same agreements. On June 20, 2018, FocalPoint International filed claims against Dominic Rubino, individually, for breach of fiduciary duty related to Mr. Rubino's role as officer and director of FocalPoint. For the Canadian matter, on February 15, 2018, Defendants filed a lawsuit against FocalPoint International asserting claims of breach of contract related to a Consulting Agreement, a Loan Agreement, and a Cash Advance Agreement. The claims also related to same alleged outstanding payments at issue in the US/Nevada matter. On February 15, 2019, the parties entered into a settlement agreement and mutual release settling both related matters, and as part of that resolution, the Canadian matter and the Nevada were dismissed with prejudice. Under the settlement agreement, FocalPoint International agreed to pay BizStratPlan, Inc. $400,000 in installments pursuant to a promissory note, Dominic Rubino agreed to transfer all of his outstanding shares of FocalPoint International to FocalPoint International upon completion of the payments, and the parties agreed to release each other from all claims.
Other than the preceding action, no litigation is required to be disclosed in this Item.
Source: Item 3 — Litigation (FDD pages 11–12)
What This Means (2025 FDD)
According to the 2025 Focalpoint Coaching Franchise Disclosure Document, there were no current litigation cases involving Focalpoint Coaching at the time the document was written. The FDD states explicitly, under Item 3, "Current Litigation: None." This indicates that, as of the issuance date of the FDD, Focalpoint Coaching was not involved in any ongoing legal disputes that required disclosure under franchise regulations.
However, the document does disclose a concluded litigation case: FocalPoint International, Inc. v. Dom Rubino Consulting Services Inc. and BizStratPlan, Inc. The case was filed in February 2018 in the United States District Court, District of Nevada, with a related action filed shortly after in the Supreme Court of British Columbia, Canada. These actions involved claims and counterclaims related to a Consulting Agreement, a Loan Agreement, and a Cash Advance Agreement. The dispute was resolved through a settlement agreement in February 2019, with both matters dismissed with prejudice. As part of the settlement, FocalPoint International agreed to pay BizStratPlan, Inc. $400,000 in installments, and Dominic Rubino agreed to transfer his shares of FocalPoint International back to the company.
The disclosure of past litigation, even when resolved, is a standard practice in FDDs to provide transparency to potential franchisees. The fact that the previous litigation was settled and dismissed with prejudice could be viewed positively, as it demonstrates Focalpoint Coaching's ability to resolve disputes. However, prospective franchisees should still consider the nature of the past claims and the terms of the settlement when evaluating the franchise opportunity. It is important to note that the FDD explicitly states that other than the disclosed action, no other litigation is required to be disclosed in Item 3.