Amicus brief objecting to the proposed settlement’s claims process and the size of the proposed counsel fee in a case involving the allegedly deceptive marketing of credit repair services. The Commission argued that the claims process was unfair to certain class members and that the proposed legal fee for class counsel was excessive and would deplete the defendants’ resources and affect the FTC’s ability to obtain redress in its own broader case.
When a court considers a case whose outcome may affect consumers or competition, the FTC may file a “friend of the court” brief to provide information that can help the court make its decision in a way that protects consumers or promotes competition. To find a specific FTC brief, use the filters on this page.Displaying 81 - 100 of 104
Amicus brief for the Federal Trade Commission, supporting argument of generic drug manufacturer that allegedly wrongful listing of patents in the FDA's "Orange Book" is not immune from antitrust liability.
Federal Trade Commission memorandum as amicus curiae (in the alternative to motion to intervene) to oppose grant of fees to private class action counsel, where much of the consumer recovery at issue resulted from the Commission's disgorgement action.
Amicus brief for the United States and the Federal Trade Commission, urging denial of Supreme Court review in a case raising an issue regarding the extent to which a foreign plaintiff can invoke the Sherman Act for damages flowing from a conspiracy that also has effects on U.S. commerce
Amicus brief for the Federal Trade Commission, supporting the State of Minnesota's authority to bring an action to enforce the Telemarketing and Consumer Fraud and Abuse Prevention Act against a non-bank subsidiary of a national bank.
Amicus brief for the United States and the Federal Trade Commission, supporting consumer's argument concerning application of statute of limitations to private action under the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
Amicus brief of the Federal Trade Commission in support of consumer's argument that claim under Magnuson Moss Warranty Act was not subject to mandatory arbitration.
Amicus brief before the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California regarding a proposed settlement between American Bioscience, Inc. (ABI) and Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. regarding the listing of a patent purportedly covering the cancer drug Taxol on the Food and Drug Administration’s Orange Book. The brief advises the court that, because the Commission had just initiated an investigation of the conduct of ABI and Bristol, the Commission was not taking a position with regard to appropriateness of listing the patent. The brief further explains the potential consequences of the proposed settlement on generic entry and the potential harm to consumers of delaying such entry. The brief expresses concern that the judicial finding that the settlement contemplates — that the patent meets the statutory requirements for listing in the Orange Book — will prejudice parties who may later challenge the listing. The brief requests the court to consider the ramifications for generic entry and the pendency of the Commission’s investigation before entering the order proposed by the parties.
Amicus brief for the Federal Trade Commission supporting individual consumer's right to maintain a cause of action under the Fair Credit Reporting Act against an entity that furnishes information to a consumer reporting agency.
Amicus brief for the United States and the Federal Trade Commission urging denial of Supreme Court review in a case raising the issue whether misrepresentations to state agency, in the course of petitioning activity, precludes a claim of immunity from antitrust liability.
Amicus brief of the Federal Trade Commission in support of consumer's claim against a consumer reporting agency, based on agency's duty to ensure maximum accuracy of credit report and to reinvestigate errors brought to its attention
Amicus brief for the United States and the Federal Trade Commission urging denial of Supreme Court review in a case raising the question whether individual ticket purchasers were barred, as indirect purchasers, from maintaining an antitrust action against a provider of ticket distribution services
Amicus brief for the United States and the Federal Trade Commission as Amici Curiae in support of suggestion of rehearing en banc.
Amicus brief for the United States and the Federal Trade Commission, urging vactatur of lower court ruling that held that a vertical agreement between a purchaser and a single supplier could constitute a per se unlawful boycott of a competing supplier, or a conspiracy to monopolize
Amicus brief for the United States and the Federal Trade Commission, urging denial of Supreme Court review in a case raising issue whether seller can maintain antitrust action based on a conspiracy between a rival seller and a single buyer, a regulated monopolist, to raise prices to the monopolist's customers by circumventing regulatory constraints.
Amicus brief of the Federal Trade Commission addressing whether a collection letter that allegedly simulates a telegraph violates the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
Amicus briefs of the Federal Trade Commission addressing whether the Fair Debt Collection Act covers collection of dishonored checks.
Amicus brief of the United States and the Federal Trade Commission addressing whether maximum resale price maintenance should be illegal per se.