The legal library gives you easy access to the FTC’s case information and other official legal, policy, and guidance documents.
20161768: Warburg Pincus Private Equity XII, L.P.; Intelligent Medical Objects, Inc.
20161733: Inception Topco, Inc.; Rackspace Hosting, Inc.
20161754: Starboard Value and Opportunity Fund Ltd.; Perrigo Company plc
Cancer Fund of America, Inc.
LabMD, Inc., In the Matter of
The Federal Trade Commission filed a complaint against medical testing laboratory LabMD, Inc. alleging that the company failed to reasonably protect the security of consumers’ personal data, including medical information. The complaint alleges that in two separate incidents, LabMD collectively exposed the personal information of approximately 10,000 consumers. The complaint alleges that LabMD billing information for over 9,000 consumers was found on a peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing network and then, in 2012, LabMD documents containing sensitive personal information of at least 500 consumers were found in the hands of identity thieves. The case is part of an ongoing effort by the Commission to ensure that companies take reasonable and appropriate measures to protect consumers’ personal data.
20161698: Easterly Acquisition Corp; Sungevity, Inc.
20161779: Vantage Energy Investment II, LLC; Vantage Energy Investment, LLC
20161785: TPG Partners VII-AIV II, L.P.; Codan Trust Company (Cayman) Limited
20161788: Canada Pension Plan Investment Board; Codan Trust Company (Cayman) Limited
Trudeau, Kevin, et al.
20161764: International Flavors & Fragrances Inc.; David Michael & Co., Inc 2015 Voting Trust
20161776: Crestview Partners III, L.P.; Accuride Corporation
20161789: ArcLight Energy Partners Fund VI, L.P.; GS Road Investors, L.L.C.
Fortiline, LLC, In the Matter of
Fortiline, LLC, a company that distributes ductile iron pipe, fittings and accessories throughout much of the United States, agreed to settle charges that it violated federal antitrust law by inviting a competitor to raise and fix prices. This is the first case where the FTC has challenged an invitation to collude by a firm that is both a direct competitor with, and a distributor for, the invitee. According to an administrative complaint filed by the FTC, on two occasions in 2010, Fortiline invited a competing firm, which mainly manufactures ductile iron pipe but also engaged in direct sales to contractors, to collude on pricing in North Carolina and most of Virginia. In some areas, Fortiline competes with this firm – identified in the complaint as “Manufacturer A” – by distributing ductile iron pipe (“DIP”) products made by another DIP manufacturer, identified as “Manufacturer B.” In other areas, Fortiline distributes the product of Manufacturer A. The FTC’s complaint alleges that on two occasions when Fortiline was competing with Manufacturer A, Fortiline communicated an invitation to collude on DIP pricing.The proposed consent order prohibits Fortiline from entering into, attempting to enter into, or inviting any agreement with any competitor to raise or fix prices, divide markets, or allocate customers.