Tag: Northern District of California

The FTC alleged that NTS IT Care and its CEO, Jagmeet Singh Virk, tricked consumers into buying expensive and unnecessary tech support services and often claimed to be affiliated with Microsoft, Apple, and other tech companies.

The FTC obtained an order against education technology provider Edmodo for collecting personal data from children without obtaining their parent’s consent and using that data for advertising, in violation of the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act Rule (COPPA Rule), and for unlawfully outsourcing its COPPA compliance responsibilities to schools. 

In February 2018, the Federal Trade Commission charged student loan debt relief scammer Brandon Frere and his companies, including Ameritech Financial, with bilking millions of dollars from thousands of consumers by falsely promising that consumers’ monthly payments would go towards paying off their student loans. In October 2020, Frere and his companies settled FTC’s charges. In August 2023, the FTC and the Department of Justice sent more than $9 million in refunds to consumers who lost money.

The Federal Trade Commission has taken enforcement action for the first time under its Health Breach Notification Rule against the telehealth and prescription drug discount provider GoodRx Holdings Inc., for failing to notify consumers and others of its unauthorized disclosures of consumers’ personal health information to Facebook, Google, and other companies.

AT&T reached a settlement with the FTC over allegations that the wireless provider misled millions of its smartphone customers by charging them for “unlimited” data plans while reducing their data speeds.

The Federal Trade Commission authorized a lawsuit in federal court to block the proposed merger between virtual reality (VR) giant Meta and Within Unlimited, the VR studio that markets Supernatural, a leading VR fitness app. Formerly known as Facebook Inc., Meta sells the most widely used VR headset, operates a widely used VR app store, and already owns many popular VR apps, including Beat Saber, reportedly one of the best-selling VR apps of all time, which it markets for fitness use. The agency alleges that Meta’s proposed acquisition of Within would stifle competition and dampen innovation in the dynamic, rapidly growing U.S. markets for fitness and dedicated-fitness VR apps. A federal court complaint and request for preliminary relief was filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to halt the transaction.

The Federal Trade Commission is returning more than $10 million to consumers who were charged undisclosed fees by online lender LendingClub Corporation. The FTC is distributing refunds directly to more than 15,000 LendingClub customers and encouraging additional LendingClub customers to apply for refunds.

The FTC sued LendingClub in April 2018, charging that the company falsely promised loan applicants that they would receive a specific loan amount with “no hidden fees,” when in reality the company deducted hundreds or even thousands of dollars in hidden up-front fees from the loans. The FTC also alleged that LendingClub told consumers they were approved for loans when they were not and took money from consumers’ bank accounts without authorization.

The Federal Trade Commission is sending payments totaling more than $9.7 million to 61,990 consumers who were charged hidden fees by LendingClub Corporation.

These payments are the result of a claims process conducted by the FTC in February 2022. It is the second distribution of funds in this matter and brings the total amount refunded to consumers to more than $17.6 million.

In September 2019, the operators of a deceptive negative option scheme agreed to a court-ordered preliminary injunction temporarily barring them from a wide range of conduct.  The preliminary injunction stops the defendants from misleading consumers about supposedly “free trial” offers, enrolling them in unwanted continuity plans, billing them without their authorization, and making it nearly impossible for them to cancel or get their money back. In June 2022, the Commission announced it was returning $5.4 million to defrauded consumers.

The FTC alleged that Twitter’s deceptive use of user email addresses and phone numbers violated the FTC Act and the 2011 Commission order.

A federal court issued a temporary restraining order against Marc and Courtney Grisham and two companies they operate, Disruption Theory LLC and Emergent Technologies LLC, which do business as inmatecall.com and inmatecallsolutions.com, related to FTC allegations they offered fake calling plans for unlimited minutes and falsely claiming to be affiliated with companies authorized to provide calling services to people who are incarcerated.

The FTC sued the operators of a mobile banking app, alleging that they falsely promised users high interest rates on their accounts and “24/7” access to their funds.

HyperBeard, a developer of apps that are popular with children has agreed to pay $150,000 and to delete personal information it illegally collected from children under 13 to settle Federal Trade Commission allegations. In a complaint filed by the Department of Justice on behalf of the FTC, the Commission alleges that HyperBeard, Inc. violated the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act Rule (COPPA Rule) by allowing third-party ad networks to collect personal information in the form of persistent identifiers to track users of the company’s child-directed apps, without notifying parents or obtaining verifiable parental consent. The ad networks used the identifiers to target ads to children using HyperBeard’s apps.

In October 2018, the FTC filed a complaint against defendants Forms Direct, Inc., also known as American Immigration Center, and owner Cesare Alessandrini, alleging that they falsely implied that their websites were affiliated with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).The defendants allegedly used such deception since 2010 to sell immigration form preparation services to consumers. The FTC’s settlement bars the defendants from continuing their misleading business practices and requires them to pay $2.2 million to compensate consumers. In early March 2020, the Commission announced it was sending checks totaling over $2 million to consumer defrauded through the scheme.

Mortgage Solutions FCS, doing business as Mount Diablo Lending, and Ramon Walker agreed to pay $120,000 to settle Federal Trade Commission allegations that it violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act and other laws by revealing personal information about consumers in response to negative reviews posted on the review website Yelp. 

The FTC filed a complaint in federal district court charging Qualcomm Inc. with using anticompetitive tactics to maintain its monopoly in the supply of a key semiconductor device used in cell phones and other consumer products.

D-Link Systems, Inc., agreed to implement a comprehensive software security program in order to settle Federal Trade Commission allegations over misrepresentations that the company took reasonable steps to secure its wireless routers and Internet-connected cameras. 

Unixiz, Inc., doing business as i-Dressup.com, and the individually named defendants CEO Zhijun Liu and Secretary Xichen Zhang, reached a settlement over allegations they violated the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA).

The FTC's complaint alleges that Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. and several other drug companies violated antitrust laws by using pay-for-delay settlements to block consumers’ access to lower-cost generic versions of Lidoderm.  The agreement not to market an authorized generic – often called a “no-AG commitment” – is the form of reverse payment.  The FTC’s complaint alleges that Endo paid the first generic companies that filed for FDA approval – Watson Laboratories, Inc. – to eliminate the risk of competition for Lidoderm, in violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act.  Lidoderm is a topical patch used to relieve pain associated with post-herpetic neuralgia, a complication of shingles.  Under federal law, the first generic applicant to challenge a branded pharmaceutical’s patent, referred to as the first filer, may be entitled to 180 days of exclusivity as against any other generic applicant upon final FDA approval. But a branded drug manufacturer is permitted to market an authorized generic version of its own brand product at any time, including during the 180 days after the first generic competitor enters the market. According to the FTC, a no-AG commitment can be extremely valuable to the first-filer generic, because it ensures that this company will capture all generic sales and be able to charge higher prices during the exclusivity period.  The FTC is seeking a court judgment declaring that the defendants’ conduct violates the antitrust laws, ordering the companies to disgorge their ill-gotten gains, and permanently barring them from engaging in similar anticompetitive behavior in the future.

Endo agreed to settle the charges in a proposed stipulated order to be entered by the court.