Daymond John, a celebrity investor on “Shark Tank”, is asking for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction against former contestants Al “Bubba” Baker, his daughter Brittani and his wife Sabrina.

John wants to stop the family from publicly talking about what they say was their “nightmare” experience after being on the ABC reality TV show.

The L.A. Times recently investigated the Bakers’ allegations that John and some of his associates and partners misled them, tried to take over their business and kept them from the profits of possible lucrative partnerships.

They questioned the business deal they made with John and Rastelli Foods Group, a meat manufacturer that was hired to make their patented Bubba’s Q Boneless Baby Back Ribs after they were on Season 5 of “Shark Tank.”

The case was dismissed this week by a federal judge in New Jersey without prejudice, because of jurisdictional issues. John has filed an amended complaint that is pending. Rastelli Foods is also seeking a restraining order against the Bakers, saying they made “false” and “defamatory statements” against the company.

Zach Rosenfield, spokesperson for Daymond John, said in a statement: “It is unfortunate that it has come to this after repeated attempts to give the Bakers the chance to fix their violations. This temporary restraining order is because of the Bakers’ obvious actions to damage a business partnership and the legal terms they agreed to 4 years ago. They think they can undo poor business choices through slanderous social media posts and articles. We will not allow that anymore.”

The Bakers said that after agreeing to an on-air offer of $300,000 for 30% of the company, John changed the terms of the deal to $100,000 for a 35% stake. They said that John did not listen to their complaints about the former “Shark Tank” contestant he hired to make their website and who they say controlled the business’s bank account. They also said that their partnership with John and Rastelli Foods was bad, and that Al Baker was left out of important business meetings and did not know about real-time financial information. They say they only got some 4% of the $16 million in revenue from the business that was stated publicly.

John denied many of the Bakers’ claims in his complaint, saying he helped their boneless rib business a lot, including using his big network of contacts. He said he was a non-managing partner of the company “without access or control over the company’s books and records,” and that his role and duties “are limited to acting as a “brand ambassador.”

John also said in his complaint that the Bakers’ actions were a “willful and malicious smear campaign” and that they broke a confidentiality rule in the parties’ operating agreement and the terms of arbitration and mediation settlements in 2019.

John also said in his complaint that he “is losing money from his business dealings with Defendants, while Defendants admit they have made at least $659,000 in profits alone.”

Three days after The Times’ story, John posted a video response on Twitter, TikTok and other social media platforms for three-and-a-half minutes, saying the Bakers broke a confidentiality agreement and calling the Times article a “flawed interview and false narrative.” He told his followers that he was making the video because “I always want you to stand up for yourself.” John did not give more details about his claims.

On May 21, the same day John posted his video response, his lawyers sent