FDD Items 3 & 4 · 2026 filing

Mi-box Mobile Storage & Moving litigation history

What Mi-box Mobile Storage & Moving disclosed about lawsuits, arbitrations and bankruptcy in the 2026 Franchise Disclosure Document. Item 3 lists the material legal actions a franchisor must report; Item 4 covers bankruptcy. This is the franchisor's own disclosure, not a court record, and not legal advice.

Items 3 (litigation) & 4 (bankruptcy) at a glance

What the filing discloses

Cases disclosed: 6; Item 3, as counted in the filing

Largest settlement, franchisor's own cases: None stated

Bankruptcy (Item 4): None; Franchisor, parent, predecessor or officer

Filing year: 2026; Disclosures cover the prior ten years

Extracted from the 2026 Franchise Disclosure Document

Item 3: litigation

DFPI (CA) order/consent order re: unregistered franchise offer/sale by affiliate MHC ($5,000 payment); Minnesota Commerce Dept civil penalty ($1,000) for unregistered offer/sale; four active civil lawsuits involving affiliate MI-BOX Holding Company brought by former dealers/master dealers alleging franchise law violations, breach of contract, trademark infringement, and related claims - franchisor believes claims are without merit.

Item 3 (litigation) · 6 matters disclosed · 4 pending listed

Litigation cases

The franchisor

Concluded (1)

Matter with no printed caption
concluded
Government or regulatory action · filed 2024-06-24 · Minnesota Department of Commerce
“The Minnesota Commerce Department determined that our affiliate, MI-BOX Holding Company, violated Minnesota law by offering and selling MI-BOX® moving and mobile storage franchise in Minnesota without having a franchise registration or exemption from registration on file with the Department.”Page 14 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “On or about June 24, 2024, we entered into a Civil Penalty Agreement with the Minnesota Commerce Department resolving this issue.”

Parent, affiliates, master franchisor and subfranchisor

Pending (4)

C&C Business Enterprises, Inc. v. MI-BOX Holding Company
pending
MI-BOX Holding Company (our affiliate) · filed 2025-04-29 · Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division (transferred to the Northern District of Illinois) · BER-L-002810-25
“… (Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division BER-L-002810-25) On April 29, 2025, C&C Business Enterprises, Inc., a MI-BOX dealer, filed a complaint against our affiliate, MI-BOX Holding Company, in”Page 13 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
MI-BOX of Southern New Hampshire, LLC v. MI-BOX Holding Company
pending
MI-BOX Holding Company (our affiliate) · filed 2025-04-29 · U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New Hampshire · 1:25-cv-04679
“… (United States District Court for the Southern District of New Hampshire, Civil Action No. 1:25-cv-04679) On April 29, 2025 a MI-BOX dealer in southern New Hampshire, MI-BOX of Southern New Hampshire, LLC (“MB SNH”) filed a complaint against our affiliate, MI-BOX Holding Company.”Page 12 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Mi-Box of North Florida, LLC v. MI-BOX Holding Company and MI-BOX Florida, LLC
pending
MI-BOX Holding Company (our affiliate) and MI-BOX Florida, LLC (a master dealer) · filed 2023-11-06 · U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division · 1:24-cv- 07520
“… (United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division;”Page 12 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
MI-BOX of New England, LLC, MI-BOX Florida, LLC v. MI-BOX Holding Company
pending
MI-BOX Holding Company (our affiliate) · U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois · 1:21-cv-5809 consolidated with No. 22 cv 4513
“… (United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois;”Page 12 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3

Status not stated in the filing (1)

DFPI Order, re: MI-BOX Holding Company, Michael Born et al. and subsequent DFPI Consent Order, re: MHC et al.
Government or regulatory action · MI-BOX Holding Company (MHC, our affiliate) and Michael Born · filed 2021-09-07 · California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation
“… On September 7, 2021, the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation (“DFPI”) issued an order arising out the offer of a dealership to a particular California resident by MI-BOX Holding Company (“MHC”).”Page 11 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “In or around June 2023, MHC and Mr. Born entered into a Consent Order wherein the named parties to this Order acknowledged: (i) that MHC engaged in subsequent activities, namely providing certain licensing/franchising information on the brand website, that the DFPI deemed constituted an “offer” of”

Item 3 lists the litigation the franchisor must disclose; a matter against a parent, an affiliate or a named officer is not a matter against the franchisor, and pending claims are allegations, not findings.

Before you weigh a lawsuit

How to read Item 3

A franchisor must disclose pending actions and any material civil action involving the franchise relationship, plus convictions or civil judgments for fraud, unfair or deceptive practices, or franchise-law violations, going back ten years. A case the franchisor brought against a franchisee counts too. Item 3 does not include every dispute: settled claims below the materiality line and matters resolved in private arbitration can be absent.

Questions worth asking current and former franchisees, using the contact list in Item 20:

Were you, or anyone you know in the system, party to a dispute with the franchisor?
Was it resolved by settlement, arbitration or a court, and on what terms?
Has the number of disputes gone up or down since you signed?

Back to the Mi-box Mobile Storage & Moving verdict Risk analysis on the brand page