Class Action Complaint, American Steel, Inc. v. Vensure Employer Services, Inc., No. 2:25-cv-03087 (D. Ariz.), Doc. 1 (Aug. 25, 2025)
Summary
A class action complaint filed August 25, 2025 as Document 1 in American Steel, Inc. v. Vensure Employer Services, Inc., Case No. 2:25-cv-03087-DJH, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. Plaintiff American Steel, Inc., a Montana corporation based in Billings, sues Arizona-based professional employer organizations Vensure Employer Services, Inc. (doing business as Vensure Employer Solutions) and VensureHR, Inc. on behalf of a putative class of at least 100 members with an amount in controversy exceeding $5,000,000 under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d)(2)(A). The complaint alleges that Vensure performed payroll administration, withholding, reporting and employment tax services for client businesses, including securing employment tax benefits and deductions.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
Cite this document
“Class Action Complaint, American Steel, Inc. v. Vensure Employer Services, Inc., No. 2:25-cv-03087 (D. Ariz.), Doc. 1 (Aug. 25, 2025).”
Original at storage.courtlistener.com. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/class-action-complaint-american-steel-inc-v-vensure-employer-services-70910cfed0/
, SHA-256 0d1bb9e4d527180e5363001f9c37be807385bac59739b3884d8927b4fa0d905d.Full text
Case 2:25-cv-03087-DJH Document 1 Filed 08/25/25 Page 1 of 18
1 Gary A. Gotto, Bar No. 007401
KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P.
2 3101 North Central Avenue, Suite 1400
3 Phoenix, AZ 85012
Telephone: (602) 248-0088
4 Facsimile: (602) 248-2822
5 ggotto@kellerrohrback.com
6 Attorneys for Plaintiff AMERICAN STEEL, INC.
7 Additional Counsel Listed on Signature Block
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
10 American Steel, Inc., individually and No.
on behalf of all others similarly
11 situated, CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
3101 North Central Avenue, Suite 1400
KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P.
12
Plaintiff, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
Telephone: (602) 248-0088
13
vs.
14
Facsimile: (602) 248-2822
Vensure Employer Services, Inc., d/b/a
Phoenix, AZ 85012
15 Vensure Employer Solutions, and
16 VensureHR, Inc.,
17 Defendants.
18
19 Plaintiff American Steel, Inc., individually and on behalf of all others similarly
20 situated, brings this class action complaint against Defendants Vensure Employer Services,
21 Inc. d/b/a Vensure Employer Solutions, and VensureHR, Inc. (collectively, “Vensure”).
22 Plaintiff alleges the following on personal knowledge, investigation of counsel, and
23 information and belief:
24
25
26
27
28
1
Case 2:25-cv-03087-DJH Document 1 Filed 08/25/25 Page 2 of 18
1 I. PARTIES
2 1. Plaintiff American Steel, Inc. (“ASI”) is a Montana corporation with its
3 principal place of business in Billings, Montana. At all relevant times herein, ASI was a
4 business that had Defendants perform payroll administration, payroll taxes, and other
5 professional employer services on its behalf.
6 2. Defendant Vensure Employer Services, Inc. d/b/a Vensure Employer
7 Solutions is an Arizona corporation with its principal place of business in Chandler,
8 Arizona.
9 3. Defendant VensureHR, Inc. is an Arizona corporation with its principal place
10 of business in Chandler, Arizona.
11 4. At all relevant times herein, Vensure provided professional employer
3101 North Central Avenue, Suite 1400
KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P.
12 services, including employment administration services and employee tax services, for
Telephone: (602) 248-0088
13 businesses.
14 II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
Facsimile: (602) 248-2822
Phoenix, AZ 85012
15 5. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
16 § 1332(d)(2)(A) because there are least 100 class members, there is minimal diversity, and
17 the amount in controversy exceeds $5,000,000, exclusive of interest and costs.
18 6. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants because they are
19 Arizona corporations and their headquarters and principal places of business are in
20 Arizona.
21 7. Venue is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391 because Defendants transact
22 substantial business in the state of Arizona, including in this District, and because a
23 substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims occurred in this District.
24 III. COMMON FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
25 A. Vensure’s Provision of Payroll and Tax Services
26 8. Vensure is a professional employer organization (“PEO”) based in Arizona
27 that provides business administration services, including payroll administration and payroll
28 tax services, for businesses across the country.
2
Case 2:25-cv-03087-DJH Document 1 Filed 08/25/25 Page 3 of 18
1 9. Among other services, Vensure provides payroll and tax administration
2 services, which include withholding, reporting, and remitting federal and state employment
3 taxes on behalf of its clients. Upon information and belief, Vensure also undertakes
4 responsibility for ensuring its clients, including Plaintiff and the other Class members,
5 secure any employment tax benefits or deductions to which they are entitled.
6 10. When Vensure provides payroll and tax administration services, clients
7 report to Vensure the wages owed to their employees. After that, Vensure determines the
8 federal and state employment taxes believed to be owed for each client’s employees and
9 requests that the client remit the wages and tax funds to Vensure. Vensure then generates
10 the paychecks for its clients’ employees and is required to deposit the associated
11 employment taxes with the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”). Notably, while Vensure is
3101 North Central Avenue, Suite 1400
KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P.
12 listed on the Form W-2s for its clients’ employees, Vensure is not these employees’
Telephone: (602) 248-0088
13 employer. Instead, Vensure only performs administrative and support services for its
14 clients.
Facsimile: (602) 248-2822
Phoenix, AZ 85012
15 11. In addition to handling regular payroll, Vensure—either directly or via
16 accounting firms—also completes quarterly employment tax reports and submits them to
17 the IRS via Form 941. Vensure completes a single, aggregate Form 941 encompassing
18 reporting for all clients, which are identified on an attached Schedule R.
19 12. To the extent employment taxes were overpaid, Vensure, at its clients’
20 direction and on its clients’ behalf, elects whether to apply that overpayment as a credit to
21 the next quarter or to request a refund of the overpaid employment taxes. At all relevant
22 times, upon information and belief, most Vensure clients requested refunds of the
23 employment tax overpayments instead of credits.
24 13. Overpaid employment taxes that are to be refunded accrue compounded
25 interest at the federal short-term rate plus two percentage points for taxpayers that are
26 corporations and plus three percentage points for other taxpayers. See 26 U.S.C.
27 § 6621(a)(1); see also 26 U.S.C. § 6611. If a client requests a refund of overpaid
28 employment taxes, upon receiving the refund, Vensure must remit that refund—including
3
Case 2:25-cv-03087-DJH Document 1 Filed 08/25/25 Page 4 of 18
1 the interest accrued thereon—to its client because the client paid the employment taxes and
2 because the refund and interest are the client’s property.
3 B. COVID-19 and the Employee Retention Credit
4 14. In 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Congress passed the
5 Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (“CARES”) Act to help the economy,
6 individuals, and employers. The CARES Act was then extended and modified by the
7 Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021.
8 15. Among several other relief programs, the CARES Act initiated the Employee
9 Retention Credit (“ERC”) for qualifying employers. As amended, the ERC uses payroll tax
10 credits or deferrals to provide benefits to small businesses impacted by the pandemic. It
11 provides a refundable tax credit of 50% of qualified wages paid in a calendar quarter for
3101 North Central Avenue, Suite 1400
KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P.
12 businesses that continued to pay employees during shutdowns or during times when the
Telephone: (602) 248-0088
13 employer had significant declines in gross receipts from March 13, 2020, to December 31,
14 2021.
Facsimile: (602) 248-2822
Phoenix, AZ 85012
15 16. Notably, when clients and former clients of a PEO seek benefits under the
16 ERC, their associated tax forms must be administratively filed through their PEO.
17 17. Nevertheless, as the lawful employers of their employees that are otherwise
18 eligible to receive the ERC, Plaintiff, the putative Class members, and other businesses
19 using PEOs are the true owners of any ERC benefits paid out by the IRS, as well as any
20 interest accruing on delays in refunding the ERC benefits (i.e., the overpaid employment
21 taxes), regardless of whether the PEOs, such as Vensure, file for or receive the ERC
22 benefits. See 26 U.S.C. § 6621(a)(1); see also 26 U.S.C. § 6611.
23 18. At all relevant times, parties filing for ERC benefits did so through IRS Form
24 941. Therefore, Vensure was responsible for determining and/or verifying the amount of
25 the ERC benefits for its clients, informing the IRS as to whether a credit or refund would
26 be requested, and then remitting the benefit of the credit or refund—as well as any interest
27 accrued thereon—to its clients. This is because Vensure’s clients are the entities that
28 continued to pay their employees during the pandemic.
4
Case 2:25-cv-03087-DJH Document 1 Filed 08/25/25 Page 5 of 18
1 19. At all relevant times, while the ERC was in effect, Vensure marked ERC
2 proceeds to be refunded on behalf of its clients and refunded the ERC benefits to its clients.
3 However, at all relevant times, Vensure failed to remit the interest paid out by the IRS that
4 accrued on the ERC benefits to its clients, including Plaintiff. Instead, Vensure kept the
5 interest the IRS paid out on the ERC refunds for its own use and benefit at its clients’
6 expense.
7 20. As a direct and proximate result of Vensure’s conduct, Plaintiff and the other
8 members of the Class incurred actual damages in an amount to be established at trial.
9 IV. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS SPECIFIC TO PLAINTIFF
10 21. Plaintiff ASI is a steel fabrication business located in Montana.
11 22. In 2009, ASI hired Avitus, Inc. (“Avitus Group”) to provide employee
3101 North Central Avenue, Suite 1400
KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P.
12 administration, payroll administration, and payroll tax services on its behalf. As part of the
Telephone: (602) 248-0088
13 parties’ relationship, Avitus Group would, among other things, withhold and collect all
14 applicable employment taxes from ASI’s employees’ paychecks.
Facsimile: (602) 248-2822
Phoenix, AZ 85012
15 23. Upon information and belief, in or around 2020, Vensure gained control over
16 Avitus Group. Upon information and belief, since then, Vensure has directed and
17 controlled all aspects of Avitus Group’s business and has made all substantive decisions
18 regarding the ERC, ERC-related filings, and the payment(s) of any ERC-related funds. At
19 all times relevant herein, Vensure has reported the taxes withheld on ASI’s behalf on a
20 quarterly basis using an aggregate IRS Form 941 submitted by Vensure.
21 24. Upon information and belief, after the CARES Act went in to effect, Vensure
22 began sending out communications to its clients providing information about the ERC and
23 soliciting the use of Vensure to file for ERC benefits. At all relevant times, these
24 communications from Vensure regarding ERC benefits all failed to inform the client that
25 the client may be entitled to interest paid out by the IRS on any ERC benefits or that
26 Vensure would retain any interest the IRS paid out. For instance, in April 2021, Vensure
27
28
5
Case 2:25-cv-03087-DJH Document 1 Filed 08/25/25 Page 6 of 18
1 sent its clients, including Plaintiff, a communication advertising the submission of ERC
2 claims through Vensure that failed to discuss interest paid out by the IRS on ERC claims:
3 See Ex. A (4.15.21 email to Plaintiff). Similarly, in February 2021, Vensure sent a
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
3101 North Central Avenue, Suite 1400
KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P.
12
Telephone: (602) 248-0088
13
14
Facsimile: (602) 248-2822
Phoenix, AZ 85012
15
16
17 communication to its clients that included information about filing ERC claims but failed
18 to discuss Vensure’s retention of interest paid out by the IRS on ERC claims:
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
6
Case 2:25-cv-03087-DJH Document 1 Filed 08/25/25 Page 7 of 18
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11 See Ex. B (2.4.21 email to Plaintiff). Upon information and belief, from at least early 2021
3101 North Central Avenue, Suite 1400
KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P.
12 to present, Vensure has sent numerous standardized communications that similarly
Telephone: (602) 248-0088
13 provided information regarding the ERC and solicited the filing of ERC claims through
14 Vensure to clients, including Plaintiff, but failed to discuss Vensure’s retention of any
Facsimile: (602) 248-2822
Phoenix, AZ 85012
15 interest paid out by the IRS on ERC benefits.
16 25. After continuing to pay employees and keep its business alive during the
17 pandemic, ASI made a claim under the ERC for the second and third quarters of 2021 for
18 the payments made to its employees during that time. Vensure submitted this ERC claim
19 to the IRS on ASI’s behalf. ASI requested that any ERC payments be transmitted to it in
20 the form of a refund.
21 26. Under the ERC, for the third quarter of 2021, ASI was entitled to a refund in
22 the amount of $297,076.16, plus the interest accruing on the refund amount. Upon
23 information and belief, the IRS paid Vensure both the amount of this refund and the interest
24 accrued on it.
25 27. However, on April 4, 2025, Vensure remitted ASI a refund amount of only
26 $297,076.16. Vensure did not include any interest payment or remit any interest to ASI.
27 Upon information and belief, Vensure also received and should have remitted to Plaintiff
28
7
Case 2:25-cv-03087-DJH Document 1 Filed 08/25/25 Page 8 of 18
1 compound interest from the IRS on the refunded amount at the federal short-term rate plus
2 two percentage points. See 26 U.S.C. § 6621(a)(1).
3 28. At all relevant times, Vensure withheld information regarding Plaintiff’s
4 entitlement to interest and the interest payment from the IRS that had accrued on Plaintiff’s
5 ERC refund, including in Vensure’s communications and advertising materials regarding
6 ERC refund claims. At no point when ASI was communicating with Vensure regarding
7 filing for ERC benefits, did Vensure inform Plaintiff that it would retain any interest the
8 IRS paid out on Plaintiff’s ERC claims. Indeed, Vensure did not inform Plaintiff that it had
9 received any interest payment from the IRS until Plaintiff inquired about it. And when
10 Plaintiff asked in April 2025 about the withheld interest payment, Vensure confirmed that
11 it had kept and was keeping the interest that is Plaintiff’s property.
3101 North Central Avenue, Suite 1400
KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P.
12 29. Plaintiff has still not received its refund from Vensure for the ERC filing for
Telephone: (602) 248-0088
13 the second quarter of 2021. Plaintiff has not received an explanation from Vensure about
14 whether Vensure has received the ERC refund amount for this filing or the interest for this
Facsimile: (602) 248-2822
Phoenix, AZ 85012
15 refund amount from the IRS.
16 30. As a direct and proximate result of Vensure’s actions, ASI has suffered injury
17 and economic damages.
18 31. Upon information and belief, Vensure’s conduct regarding ASI and the
19 interest paid by the IRS on ASI’s ERC refunds is part of Vensure’s business practices and
20 policies that are common to all Class members.
21 V. ESTOPPEL/TOLLING
22 32. Because of its fiduciary relationship of special trust and confidence with
23 Plaintiff and the members of the Class, including with respect to the manner in which
24 Vensure handled the property of Plaintiff and members of the Class, Vensure is and at all
25 relevant times was under a continuous duty to disclose to Plaintiff and other Class members
26 the nature and intent of its transactions and to provide its services in good faith.
27 33. Vensure misled Plaintiff and Class members, withheld material information,
28 actively concealed and/or failed to disclose material facts, and/or actively concealed its
8
Case 2:25-cv-03087-DJH Document 1 Filed 08/25/25 Page 9 of 18
1 conduct, which deprived Plaintiff and the other Class members of substantial interest on
2 tax refunds, as explained herein.
3 34. At all relevant times herein, Vensure knew its clients, such as Plaintiff and
4 the other Class members, were entitled to the interest paid out by the IRS on their ERC
5 refunds. But Vensure nonetheless kept this interest for itself and withheld the existence of
6 the interest payment and Vensure’s retention of it from Plaintiff and the putative Class
7 members.
8 35. Based on the foregoing, Vensure is estopped from relying on any statutes of
9 limitation, and any applicable statutes of limitation have been tolled.
10 VI. CLASS ALLEGATIONS
11 36. Plaintiff brings this action both individually and as a class action, under
3101 North Central Avenue, Suite 1400
KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P.
12 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(a), (b)(2), and (b)(3), on behalf of themselves and the
Telephone: (602) 248-0088
13 following Class:
14 For the period of January 1, 2020, to present, all current and former
Facsimile: (602) 248-2822
individuals and entities that have used Defendants to file for and/or claim
Phoenix, AZ 85012
15 ERC benefits and received at least one ERC benefit refund check but were
16 not remitted the interest paid by the IRS thereon.
17 37. The proposed Class is readily ascertainable because it is defined using
18 objective criteria, allowing Class members to determine if they are part of the Class.
19 Further, Class members can be readily identified through Defendants’ records and
20 information in Defendants’ possession, custody, or control. For example, upon information
21 and belief, Vensure maintains records for each of its clients, including records of ERC
22 filings and payments.
23 38. Plaintiff’s claims are typical of those of the Class. Plaintiff and Class
24 members were damaged in the same way by the same conduct of the same Defendants.
25 39. Plaintiff will adequately protect and represent the interests of the proposed
26 Class members. Plaintiff’s interests are aligned with, and not antagonistic to, those of Class
27 members.
28
9
Case 2:25-cv-03087-DJH Document 1 Filed 08/25/25 Page 10 of 18
1 40. Plaintiff is represented by attorneys who are experienced and competent in
2 the prosecution of complex class action litigation.
3 41. Questions of law and fact common to the Class include, but are not limited
4 to, the following:
5 a. Whether Defendants processed ERC claims for Class members via Form 941
submissions;
6
b. Whether Defendants received Class members’ ERC funds from the IRS in
7 the form of refunds pursuant to Form 941 submissions;
8
c. Whether Defendants received any interest from the IRS on refunds pursuant
9 to Form 941 submissions;
10 d. Whether Defendants had a policy or practice to withhold information
regarding interest payments received from the IRS;
11
3101 North Central Avenue, Suite 1400
KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P.
12 e. Whether Defendants had a policy or practice of withholding information
regarding its retention of interest payments when advertising or selling its
Telephone: (602) 248-0088
13 services;
14 f. Whether such withholding constituted providing false or misleading
Facsimile: (602) 248-2822
Phoenix, AZ 85012
15 information concerning the existence of interest payments under the Arizona
Consumer Fraud Act;
16
g. Whether Defendants remitted refunds and/or interest obtained from the IRS
17 to Class members on receipt;
18
h. Whether Defendants intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, or negligently
19 failed to remit interest payments to Class members;
20 i. Whether Defendants wrongfully exerted control or dominion, to the
exclusion of Class members, over interest paid on their ERC refunds;
21
22 j. Whether Defendants’ conduct, policies, and business practices relating to
interest obtained from the IRS had a tendency to deceive the public;
23
k. Whether Defendants’ conduct alleged herein violated the Arizona Consumer
24 Fraud Act; and,
25
l. Whether Class members are entitled to damages, restitution, a constructive
26 trust, equitable relief, and/or other relief.
27
28
10
Case 2:25-cv-03087-DJH Document 1 Filed 08/25/25 Page 11 of 18
1 42. The above-identified common questions predominate over questions, if any,
2 that may affect only individual Class members.
3 43. The prosecution of separate actions by individual Class members would
4 create a risk of inconsistent or varying adjudications, establishing incompatible standards
5 of conduct for Defendants.
6 44. Although the exact number of Class members is uncertain, the number of
7 putative Class members is greater than 100 such that joinder is impracticable. Upon
8 information and belief, Defendants have filed ERC claims on behalf of hundreds of clients
9 or more during the relevant period.
10 45. Class action treatment is a superior method for the fair and efficient
11 adjudication of this controversy because class treatment will permit a large number of
3101 North Central Avenue, Suite 1400
KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P.
12 similarly situated persons to prosecute their common claims in a single forum
Telephone: (602) 248-0088
13 simultaneously, efficiently, and without the necessary duplication of evidence, effort, and
14 expense that numerous individual actions would require.
Facsimile: (602) 248-2822
Phoenix, AZ 85012
15 46. A class action is appropriate under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3)
16 because questions of law or fact common to Class members predominate over any
17 questions affecting only individual members and a class action is superior to any other
18 available means for fairly and efficiently adjudicating the controversy. Trying this case on
19 a class basis will be manageable. Plaintiff knows of no special difficulty that will be
20 encountered in maintaining the action that would preclude maintaining it as a class action.
21 47. Rule 23(b)(2)’s elements are also met. Absent injunctive relief, Defendants
22 will continue to commit the violations and engage in the conduct alleged herein.
23 Defendants have acted on grounds that apply generally to members of the Class so that
24 preliminary and/or final injunctive relief and corresponding declaratory relief is
25 appropriate respecting the Class as a whole.
26
27
28
11
Case 2:25-cv-03087-DJH Document 1 Filed 08/25/25 Page 12 of 18
1 UNJUST ENRICHMENT
2 48. Plaintiff and the putative Class members re-allege and incorporate by
3 reference paragraphs 1 to 47 as if fully set forth herein.
4 49. Plaintiff and Class members lack an adequate remedy at law.
5 50. As alleged herein, Defendants received an economic benefit from Plaintiff
6 and Class members in the form of the amount of interest the IRS paid on Plaintiff’s and
7 Class members’ ERC claims, which was, at all relevant times herein, Plaintiff’s and Class
8 members’ lawful property.
9 51. The benefit Defendants received came at Plaintiff’s and Class members’
10 expense because Plaintiff and Class members did not receive the interest payment from the
11 IRS that they were lawfully entitled to.
3101 North Central Avenue, Suite 1400
KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P.
12 52. Defendants accepted, appreciated, and retained the interest the IRS paid on
Telephone: (602) 248-0088
13 Plaintiff’s and Class members’ ERC claims under circumstances that make it inequitable
14 and unjust for Defendants to do so without compensating Plaintiff and Class members.
Facsimile: (602) 248-2822
Phoenix, AZ 85012
15 53. There is no reasonable justification for Defendants’ retention of the interest
16 the IRS paid on Plaintiff’s and Class members’ ERC claims.
17 54. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ unjust enrichment, Plaintiff
18 and Class members have suffered an impoverishment, in the form of economic damages,
19 in an amount to be determined at trial.
20 55. To the extent that money damages, if available, would constitute an adequate
21 remedy at law barring recovery under this claim, Plaintiff and Class members assert their
22 claim for disgorgement as an alternative remedy.
23 56. Plaintiff and Class members are entitled to disgorgement of Defendants’ ill-
24 gotten gains, and/or the imposition of a constructive trust to recover the amount of
25 Defendants’ ill-gotten gains.
26
27
28
12
Case 2:25-cv-03087-DJH Document 1 Filed 08/25/25 Page 13 of 18
1 CONVERSION
2 57. Plaintiff and the putative Class members re-allege and incorporate by
3 reference paragraphs 1 to 56 as if fully set forth herein.
4 58. At all relevant times, the interest the IRS paid on Plaintiff’s and Class
5 members’ ERC claims was Plaintiff’s and Class members’ lawful property to which
6 Plaintiff and Class members were fully entitled. Plaintiff and Class members had an
7 immediate possessory interest in the accrued interest on their ERC claims.
8 59. As alleged herein, instead of remitting the interest the IRS paid out on
9 Plaintiff’s and Class members’ ERC claims, Defendants knowingly and intentionally
10 retained the interest the IRS paid out on Plaintiff’s and Class members’ ERC claims for
11 Defendants’ own benefit, without legal justification or consent.
3101 North Central Avenue, Suite 1400
KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P.
12 60. Defendants exercised dominion and control over the interest in a manner
Telephone: (602) 248-0088
13 inconsistent with Plaintiff’s and Class members’ rights by withholding and converting it
14 for Defendants’ own use and/or failing to remit it to Plaintiff and Class members.
Facsimile: (602) 248-2822
Phoenix, AZ 85012
15 61. Defendants can, on information and belief, readily identify or segregate the
16 interest the IRS paid on Plaintiff’s and Class members’ ERC claims upon review of their
17 own business records, including records of their clients’ ERC filings and payments.
18 62. Defendants had no legal right or authority to retain the interest the IRS paid
19 on Plaintiff’s and Class members’ ERC claims. Instead, Defendants had an obligation to
20 remit this interest to Plaintiff and Class members under 26 U.S.C. §§ 6611, 6621.
21 63. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ conduct, Plaintiff and Class
22 members have been deprived of the economic benefits to which they were entitled and
23 have suffered economic harm in an amount to be determined at trial.
24 64. Defendants intended to injure Plaintiff and Class members, and Defendants’
25 actions consciously disregarded the risk of significant harm to Plaintiff’s and Class
26 members’ rights, justifying the imposition of punitive damages under Arizona law.
27
28
13
Case 2:25-cv-03087-DJH Document 1 Filed 08/25/25 Page 14 of 18
1 VIOLATION OF THE ARIZONA CONSUMER FRAUD
2 ACT, ARIZ. REV. STAT. ANN. § 44-1521 ET SEQ.
3 65. Plaintiff and the putative Class members re-allege and incorporate by
4 reference paragraphs 1 to 64 as if fully set forth herein.
5 66. Plaintiff and Class members are “persons” under the Arizona Consumer
6 Fraud Act (“ACFA”). See Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 44-1521(6) (defining “person” to include
7 any corporation, company, or business entity).
8 67. The ACFA prohibits the use of “any deception, deceptive or unfair act or
9 practice, fraud, false pretense, false promise, misrepresentation, or concealment,
10 suppression or omission of any material fact … in connection with the sale or
11 advertisement of any merchandise.” See Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 44-1522(A); id. § 44-
3101 North Central Avenue, Suite 1400
KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P.
12 1521(5) (defining “merchandise” to include any services).
Telephone: (602) 248-0088
13 68. As set forth herein, Defendants have engaged in unfair and/or deceptive trade
14 practices by:
Facsimile: (602) 248-2822
Phoenix, AZ 85012
15 A. Withholding, omitting, concealing, and/or failing to disclose material
16 information in communications with Plaintiff and Class members in connection
17 with advertisement and sales of their services, including their entitlement to interest
18 paid out by the IRS on their ERC refunds and that Defendants would be retaining
19 the amount of interest paid out by the IRS; and
20 B. Failing to remit and keeping for their own benefit the interest
21 payments the IRS paid out on Plaintiff’s and Class members’ ERC refunds when
22 they knew the interest payments were Plaintiff’s and Class members’ rightful
23 property.
24 69. By engaging in the above unfair and/or deceptive trade practices, Defendants
25 have made material misrepresentations and engaged in deceptive trade practices in
26 violation of the ACFA.
27 70. At all relevant times, Defendants knew the value of the ERC-related
28 payments that their clients received from the IRS. Defendants’ failure to communicate to
14
Case 2:25-cv-03087-DJH Document 1 Filed 08/25/25 Page 15 of 18
1 their clients their intention to keep the interest was false, misleading, and/or deceptive.
2 Defendants’ retention of interest that the IRS paid on Plaintiff’s and Class members’ ERC
3 claims was neither disclosed nor authorized by Plaintiff or Class members.
4 71. Defendants’ business practices and general course of conduct as alleged
5 herein are unfair and injurious to the public interest, and the acts complained of herein are
6 ongoing and/or have a substantial likelihood of being repeated. Defendants’ conduct,
7 policies, and business practices alleged herein had and/or have the tendency to deceive the
8 public.
9 72. By engaging in the wrongful conduct set forth herein, which has occurred in
10 connection with the advertisement and sale of its services, Defendants have violated and
11 continue to violate section 44-1522(A) of the ACFA. Specifically, as alleged in this
3101 North Central Avenue, Suite 1400
KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P.
12 Complaint, Defendants have committed and continue to commit deceptive and unfair acts
Telephone: (602) 248-0088
13 or practices by concealing, suppressing, and omitting material facts, including the fact that
14 Plaintiff and Class members were entitled to receive interest on ERC benefits from the IRS
Facsimile: (602) 248-2822
Phoenix, AZ 85012
15 and that Vensure was retaining the interest the IRS paid on Plaintiff’s and Class members’
16 ERC benefits for Vensure’s own benefit.
17 73. As set forth herein, Plaintiff and Class members were all exposed to the same,
18 uniform omissions of material information relating to Vensure’s retention of the interest
19 the IRS paid on Plaintiff’s and Class members’ ERC claims.
20 74. Defendants’ omissions relating to their withholding of interest paid by the
21 IRS on their clients’ ERC claims were material because the amount of interest was
22 significant and valuable to Plaintiff’s and Class members’ businesses.
23 75. At all relevant times, Defendants intended for Plaintiff and Class members
24 to rely on their unfair and deceptive acts and omissions. Plaintiff and Class members
25 detrimentally relied on Defendants’ failure to disclose Defendants’ retention of interest
26 owed to Plaintiff and Class members.
27
28
15
Case 2:25-cv-03087-DJH Document 1 Filed 08/25/25 Page 16 of 18
1 76. As a proximate result of Defendants’ unfair and deceptive conduct, Plaintiff
2 and Class members suffered actual damages as set forth herein, including by failing to
3 receive the economic benefits of the interest the IRS paid out on Plaintiff’s and Class
4 members’ ERC claims.
5 77. Plaintiff, on behalf of itself and the Class, seeks an order awarding them
6 actual damages in an amount to be proven at trial and such other relief to which they may
7 be entitled.
8 78. Defendants intended to injure Plaintiff and Class members, and Defendants’
9 actions consciously disregarded the risk of significant harm to Plaintiff’s and Class
10 members’ rights, justifying the imposition of punitive damages under Arizona law.
11 Therefore, Plaintiff also seeks an award of punitive damages.
3101 North Central Avenue, Suite 1400
KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P.
12 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, on its own behalf and on behalf of the members of the
Telephone: (602) 248-0088
13 Class, demands judgment against Vensure for:
14 A. appropriate relief, including actual, compensatory, and/or statutory
Facsimile: (602) 248-2822
Phoenix, AZ 85012
damages, and punitive damages (as permitted by law), in an amount to be
15
determined at trial;
16
B. any and all equitable, injunctive, and declaratory relief as may be
17 appropriate, including orders of disgorgement of Defendants’ unlawful gains, and
18 restitution;
19 C. injunctive relief as set forth above, disgorgement of profits and
unlawful gains, and/or imposition of a constructive trust on the withheld interest and
20 all amounts earned thereon by Defendants’;
21
D. pre-judgment and post-judgment interest;
22
E. the costs of suit, including attorneys’ fees; and
23
F. any and all other relief which the Court deems just and proper.
24
25
26
27
28
16
Case 2:25-cv-03087-DJH Document 1 Filed 08/25/25 Page 17 of 18
1 FURTHER WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully demands a trial by jury on all
2 counts so triable.
3 DATED this 25th day of August, 2025.
4 KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P.
5
By s/ Gary A. Gotto
6 Gary A. Gotto
3101 North Central Avenue, Suite 1400
7 Phoenix, AZ 85012
8 Telephone: (602) 248-0088
ggotto@kellerrohrback.com
9
Laura R. Gerber
10
(Pro Hac Vice forthcoming)
11 Michael D. Woerner
3101 North Central Avenue, Suite 1400
(Pro Hac Vice forthcoming)
KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P.
12 Andrew N. Lindsay
Telephone: (602) 248-0088
13 (Pro Hac Vice forthcoming)
KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P.
14 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3400
Facsimile: (602) 248-2822
Phoenix, AZ 85012
Seattle, WA 98101
15
Telephone: (206) 623-1900
16 lgerber@kellerrohrback.com
mwoerner@kellerrohrback.com
17 alindsay@kellerrohrback.com
18
James C. Bradley
19 (Pro Hac Vice forthcoming)
Nina Fields Britt
20
(Pro Hac Vice forthcoming)
21 Caleb M. Hodge
(Pro Hac Vice forthcoming)
22 ROGERS PATRICK, WESTBROOK &
23 BRICKMAN, LLC
1037 Chuck Dawley Blvd., Bldg. A
24 Post Office Box 1007
Mount Pleasant, SC 29465
25
Telephone: (843) 727-6500
26 jbradley@rpwb.com
nfields@rpwb.com
27 chodge@rpwb.com
28
17
Case 2:25-cv-03087-DJH Document 1 Filed 08/25/25 Page 18 of 18
1 Timothy C. Bailey
(Pro Hac Vice forthcoming)
2 BAILEY JAVINS & CARTER, LLC
3 213 Hale Street
Charleston, West Virginia 25301
4 Telephone: (304) 345-0346
5 tbailey@bjc4u.com
6 Andrew Burnett
(Pro Hac Vice forthcoming)
7 BURNETT INJURY GROUP, LLC
2661 Riva Road, Building 1000, #1010
8
Annapolis MD 21401
9 Telephone: (443) 214-2600
andrew@burnettinjurygroup.com
10
11 Attorneys for Plaintiff American Steel, Inc. and
the Putative Class
3101 North Central Avenue, Suite 1400
KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P.
12 4933-6674-0833, v. 3
Telephone: (602) 248-0088
13
14
Facsimile: (602) 248-2822
Phoenix, AZ 85012
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
18
File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.azd.1455375.1.0.pdf
- Size
- 607,093 bytes
- SHA-256
- 0d1bb9e4d527180e5363001f9c37be807385bac59739b3884d8927b4fa0d905d
- Our copy
- gov.uscourts.azd.1455375.1.0.pdf
- Original
- storage.courtlistener.com