Archives for 2012

XP Technology Retains Cause of Action in DOE Cronyism Suit

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                                                                                CONTACT:

NOVEMBER 23, 2012                                                                        Mary Beth Hutchins or Briton Bennett





WASHINGTON – Cause of Action, a government accountability organization, now represents San Francisco-based XP Technology in its November 14, 2012 lawsuit against the federal government concerning the U.S. Department of Energy’s denial of XP Technology’s loan guarantee application under the Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing (AVTM) loan program.


XP Technology’s complaint, filed in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, alleges that “corruption and negligence” pervaded DOE’s decision to award loan guarantees to Ford, Nissan, Tesla Motors, and Fisker Automotive for the development of electric vehicle technology.
“The Department of Energy has acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner at the expense of American small businesses that have sought to reduce our country’s dependence on foreign oil,” asserted Scott Douglas Redmond, XP’s lead investor.


About XP Technology:
In development for nearly a dozen years, with millions of dollars in resources already invested, XP Technology., is on a mission is to develop the safest, most affordable vehicle with the lowest total cost of operation (TCO) and the best power-to-weight ratio powered by alternative energy. The battery pack is capable of dramatically exceeding the range of any shipping electric vehicle with four passengers. However, it could reach 300 miles with the continuous and hot-swappable charge of an optional XP Auxiliary Power Unit.  For more information on XP Vehicles, please visit


About Cause of Action:

Cause of Action is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization that uses investigative, legal, and communications tools to educate the public on how government accountability and transparency protects taxpayer interests and economic opportunity. For more information, visit


All legal inquiries should be directed to Cause of Action’s Executive Director, Dan Epstein, at 202-400-2720. Media inquiries should be brought to the attention of Mary Beth Hutchins, or Briton Bennett,



Amber Abbasi: Questioning FDA Regulation of Private Sperm Donation, speech at Columbia Law School

Video: Questioning FDA Regulation of Private Sperm Donation



AP: Judge eyes challenge to Delaware Bloom Energy deal

Judge eyes challenge to Delaware Bloom Energy deal 

“”What we’re asking for is for the court to permit free competition,” said Amber Abassi, a lawyer for Cause of Action, a Washington D.C.-based legal advocacy group. The group is representing FuelCell Energy and Delmarva ratepayer John Nichols. Private attorneys hired by the state to represent Markell argued Wednesday that the suit should be dismissed because FuelCell has made no effort to conduct business in Delaware and thus cannot show that it has been harmed. David McBride, an attorney representing Markell, told Magistrate Judge Christopher Burke that it would be a “travesty” for the court to blow up the Bloom Energy deal with no assurance that FuelCell Energy would step in.”

Read the full story here.

Greenwire: Profile of Cause of Action, the watchdog group could be the “busiest advocacy group”

The most active nonprofit you’ve never heard of

Learn More

Statement on Opposition for Motion to Dismiss, Nichols et al. v. Markell et al.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                                                        CONTACT:

NOVEMBER 14, 2012                                                      Mary Beth Hutchins 202-499-4232


Regarding Oral Arguments for Motion to Dismiss in the matter of Nichols et al. v. Markell et al.

Cause of Action is committed to exposing the story of cronyism that has been going on between Bloom Energy and Jack Markell. We’re grateful we had the opportunity to speak out today, and inform the judge about the need for a fair trial. We believe that this issue of cronyism is one that, if left untreated, will continue to negatively affect the taxpayers of Delaware. We look forward to the judge’s decision to allow our case to proceed and for the chance to fight the corporate welfare that continues to harm both business and citizen alike.



Update: CoA to defend motion to dismiss in Fuel Cell Energy cronyism case

Over the past few months, Cause of Action has been working to expose the state of Delaware’s scheme to favor Bloom Energy, Inc. over its competitors. The cronyism that has been taking place reveals unconstitutional discrimination against other companies and because of this deal, the burden has been unfairly placed on Delaware taxpayers.

Today, Cause of Action’s Chief Counsel for Regulatory Affairs, Amber Abbasi, presented oral arguments in court arguing the need for a fair trial. We hope the judge will decide to allow us to defend the taxpayers of Delaware and fight the cronyism deal.

Read more about the case here. The complaint can be found here.

Should the federal government have unchecked authority to interfere in matters of business and trade?

Should the federal government have unchecked authority to interfere in matters of business and trade at the expense of due process rights?

This question has been brought to light in Ralls Corp. v. Obama et al, a lawsuit challenging a shut-down of a Chinese-owned wind farm project in Oregon.

Cause of Action filed an amicus brief in the suit, and at the heart of our interest in this case is an American-owned green energy company called Oregon Windfarms who originally designed the “Butter Creek Projects”—a group of 4 windfarms that started development and were slated to be sold to Ralls Corporation before the government intruded. The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), an agency created originally during the Cold War era to protect the interest of American business, has exacerbated its presumed authority and intervened to stop the wind farm project. The halted deal not only harmed Ralls Corp., a privately owned Chinese company, but it also arrested an investment that started right here in the United States.

The display of power by both the President and CFIUS is disconcerting, to say the least; however, the fact that both CFIUS and President Obama are directly limiting the ability of American businesses is of much greater concern. While American businesses and workers are entitled to due process when it comes to their property, in the case of Ralls Corp. the government saw fit to ignore these rights and arbitrarily deny a company from conducting business simply because its owners are Chinese.

Further, future jobs and American businesses may be in jeopardy. This action by CFIUS and POTUS sets a less than favorable precedent for future foreign investments in an ever-shrinking global economy.

CFIUS and the President may hide behind the guise of protecting the American citizenry, but when you lift the veil of rhetoric, the long-term effects felt by the American people are much worse than allowing an American-owned business to engage with a foreign investor.

You can read our brief here.