Law360 (March 16, 2026, 9:03 PM EDT) — A Georgia federal judge struck the answer filed by Edible Arrangements‘ former chief operating officer and his company as a sanction for bad faith discovery conduct, finding they hid key evidence about millions in vendor checks deposited into a personal account.

U.S. District Judge Thomas W. Thrash Jr. also tossed former President and COO Cheikh Mboup and his company E.A. International LLC’s counterclaims in a Friday order, ruling they failed to show recoverable damages from Edible’s lawsuit.

The “drastic remedy” of striking the defendants’ answer in its entirety is appropriate, the judge found, because “Mboup and EAI repeatedly and willfully misrepresented facts or misled Edible during the discovery process.” Those misrepresentations, Judge Thrash said, allowed the two to hide at least $1.4 million in checks that were deposited into EAI’s bank account for nearly two years.

“These circumstances are not a case of ‘simple negligence, misunderstanding, or inability to comply’ but rather willful conduct and bad faith,” Judge Thrash said. “The defendants have failed to provide any reasonable or credible justification for hiding the principal evidence in this case.”

The checks at issue are central to the lawsuit, the judge found, as Edible alleged Mboup and EAI embezzled millions of dollars by depositing checks made payable to it into EAI’s bank account, which he exclusively controlled.

Mboup, records show, admitted that he made the deposits but said they were authorized by Edible CEO Tariq Farid. EAI and Mboup testified that Farid authorized Mboup to take home vendor checks that would provide compensation otherwise expected through a now-shuttered business they co-operated known as Halal Brands LLC. Mboup also testified that Farid would meet with him to divvy up the rebate checks between the two of them as compensation.

But Judge Thrash said that does not matter when “there is no certainty that the defendants would have corrected their prior discovery responses” if Edible had not discovered those checks through a “separate criminal investigation.”

“This conduct has prejudiced Edible,” Judge Thrash said. “Edible has since amended its complaint to increase its damages amount by approximately $1.4 million, served additional discovery responses to the defendants, conducted an internal investigation, and subpoenaed third parties.”

Also relevant, the judge said, is Mboup’s “false testimony” regarding his educational credentials. “The deliberateness of this lie is evidenced by the fact that Mboup repeated the same lie to Edible as

part of his initial job application and in other places,” Judge Thrash said. “The defendants do not deny

the lie; rather, they primarily argue that the falsehood is immaterial and not sanctionable.”

While the defendants are correct that a falsehood in a deposition isn’t a justification for sanctions in most cases, the judge said he must take it into account in his “broader finding” of Mboup’s pattern of bad faith behavior.

“Taking into consideration the multiple instances of bad faith conduct, the court is not persuaded that

the importance of integrity in the discovery process has been impressed upon the defendants, nor is it persuaded that lesser sanctions would deter them from future misconduct,” Judge Thrash said.

The judge declined to impose the additional sanction of requiring Mboup and EAI to pay Edible’s legal fees and expenses; however, he decided to strike a portion of their counterclaim that alleged Farid told Mboup he believed Edible’s employment of “‘gay individuals'” was hurting the company and the subsequent termination of gay employees. It was also alleged that Farid expressed a distrust of Black women and that the only Black female executive at Edible ultimately left the company.

Judge Thrash said striking that portion of the counterclaim was appropriate because the allegations are “irrelevant to the present claims, likely to confuse the jury, and prejudicial.”

While the judge said it was possible the allegations might help Mboup show he left Edible for reasons other than the alleged fraud scheme, he said Mboup’s justification was not relevant to counterclaims concerning Edible’s supposed breach of his employment contract and alleged breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing.

“Mboup’s alleged conversations with Farid regarding hiring gay or Black employees do not make those claims any more or less likely to succeed,” Judge Thrash said.

In a counterclaim, Mboup and EAI alleged that Edible’s lawsuit breached an offer letter Mboup signed upon hire that promised he could engage in other business ventures and that Edible would have no right to any of the income or profits from those ventures. They also alleged breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing.

Judge Thrash said Edible was entitled to judgment as a matter of law on both because Mboup and EAI “failed to show evidence of — or even allege — any actions taken by Edible” to cause reputational harm. The two, he said, appeared to have abandoned “any notion” of economic damages previously.

Representatives of the parties did not respond immediately to requests for comment.

Edible Arrangements is represented by Richard Lance Robbins, Catherine Clare Sullivan, Jason Alloy, Ryand Read and Matthew T. Parrish of Robbins Alloy Belinfante Littlefield LLC.

Mboup and E.A. International are represented by Kevin L. Ward, Christopher James Williams and Andrea Lynn Pawlak of Schulten Ward Turner & Weiss LLP, by Michael R. Cavendish of Cavendish Partners PA and by Donald Franklin Samuel of Garland Samuel & Loeb PC.

The case is Edible Arrangements LLC v. Mboup et al., case number 1:23-cv-01158, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia.