Every year the FTC brings hundreds of cases against individuals and companies for violating consumer protection and competition laws that the agency enforces. These cases can involve fraud, scams, identity theft, false advertising, privacy violations, anti-competitive behavior and more. The Legal Library has detailed information about cases we have brought in federal court or through our internal administrative process, called an adjudicative proceeding.
DDC Laboratories, Inc., also d/b/a DNA Diagnostics Center, In the Matter of
Akorn and Hi-Tech Pharmacal, In the Matter of
Akorn Enterprises, Inc. and Hi-Tech Pharmacal, Inc. agreed to sell the rights and assets to three generic prescription eye medications and two generic topical anesthetics to Watson Laboratories, Inc., to settle FTC charges that Akorn’s proposed $640 million acquisition of Hi-Tech would be anticompetitive and lead to higher prices for consumers. The proposed order requires the parties to sell either Akorn’s or Hi-Tech’s rights and assets to each of the five drug products to Watson, and requires Akorn to assign Watson its contract for making branded and generic EMLA cream within 10 days after the deal is consummated. In addition, the companies must maintain the drugs to be sold as viable, marketable, and competitive pending their divestiture, and must allow the FTC to appoint a monitor to ensure that the companies comply with the order’s requirements.
Shire Laboratories, Inc. / Barr Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
IDEXX Laboratories, Inc., In the Matter of
The largest U.S. supplier of diagnostic testing products used by small animal veterinarians, IDEXX Laboratories, Inc., agreed to drop its exclusive-dealing arrangements with a top distributor, resolving FTC charges that it was using the exclusive arrangements to stifle competition. IDEXX has agreed to a settlement order that prohibits concurrent exclusive distribution arrangements with the three national distributors of point-of-care (POC) diagnostic testing products. According to the FTC’s complaint, IDEXX has used its dominant market power to reduce competition by threatening to drop the distributors if they carried other companies’ products that compete with IDEXX products.
Barr Laboratories, Inc. / Bayer Schering Pharma AG
Perrigo Company and Paddock Laboratories, Inc., In the Matter of
On 7/26/2011, the Commission required generic drug manufacturers Perrigo Company and Paddock Laboratories, Inc. to sell six generic drugs under a proposed settlement resolving charges that Perrigo’s proposed $540 million acquisition of Paddock would be anticompetitive. The proposed settlement also contains provisions to ensure future competition in the market for generic testosterone gel product. On 6/26/2012, the FTC issued a modified final order that required the companies to sell six generic drugs to Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc. (Sanofi), In the Matter of
On 12/12/2011, the FTC approved orders requiring Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc. to divest three drugs used to treat different skin ailments, as conditions of acquiring Ortho Dermatologics, Inc. from Johnson & Johnson, and Dermik Laboratories, Inc. from Sanofi. Under the settlements, Valeant will sell the manufacturing and marketing rights to drug products that treat acne and actinic keratosis, a pre-cancerous skin lesion, to Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. Valeant also will sell the marketing rights to a drug that treats fine line wrinkles to Spear Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Both settlements preserve competition and prevent higher prices that likely would have resulted from the acquisitions. (also see 1110216).
Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc. (Johnson & Johnson), In the Matter of
On 12/12/2011, the FTC approved orders requiring Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc. to divest three drugs used to treat different skin ailments, as conditions of acquiring Ortho Dermatologics, Inc. from Johnson & Johnson, and Dermik Laboratories, Inc. from Sanofi. Under the settlements, Valeant will sell the manufacturing and marketing rights to drug products that treat acne and actinic keratosis, a pre-cancerous skin lesion, to Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. Valeant also will sell the marketing rights to a drug that treats fine line wrinkles to Spear Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Both settlements preserve competition and prevent higher prices that likely would have resulted from the acquisitions. (also see 1110215).
Laboratory Corporation of America and Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings, In the Matter of
The FTC challenged Laboratory Corporation of America’s $57.5 million acquisition of rival clinical laboratory testing company Westcliff Medical Laboratories, Inc., alleging that the transaction would lead to higher prices and lower quality in the Southern California market for the sale of clinical laboratory testing services to physician groups. The complaint also alleges that LabCorp’s acquisition of Westcliff would leave only two significant laboratories in Southern California competing to provide critical testing services to most physician groups.The FTC also filed an action in federal court to prevent LabCorp from integrating the Westcliff assets while the case is being tried in the administrative court. The federal court denied the FTC motion for an injunction pending appeal. Staff filed an emergency motion for an injunction pending appeal with the 9th Circuit, which denied the Commission's appeal. The Commission dismissed its complaint and closed the investigation.
Charles River Laboratories International, Inc. / WuXi PharmaTech (Cayman) Inc.
Abbott (TriCor)
Inverness Medical Innovations, Inc., In the Matter of
In order to restore competition in the U.S. market for consumer pregnancy tests, the Commission effectively reversed a consummated transaction in which Inverness Medical Innovations, a 70% market share holder, purchased the assets related to the development of a water-soluble dye based pregnancy test from ACON Laboratories in order to protect its monopoly power in the market. According to the Commission’s complaint, Inverness restrained competition in two ways. First, Inverness issued covenants not to compete to ACON, took profits from ACON’s joint venture with Church & Dwight, and purchased intellectual property rights which would restrict ACON from developing competing products. Second, Inverness limited product innovation by purchasing, but not using, the water-soluble dye test technology purchased from ACON, one of the only companies utilizing that technology. The Commission’s consent order ended any restrictions Inverness had over the joint venture between ACON and Church & Dwight, and required that Inverness divest its assets relating to the water-soluble dye technology, and its related pregnancy test product.
Ultralife Fitness, Inc., dba Pure Health Laboratories, et al.
Warner Chilcott Holdings Company III, Ltd.; Warner Chilcott Corporation; Warner Chilcott (US) Inc.; Galen (Chemicals) Ltd.; and Barr Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Mylan Laboratories Inc. and E. Merck oHG., In the Matter of
Actavis Group hf. and Abrika Pharmaceuticals, Inc., In the Matter of
Cephalon, Inc., and CIMA Labs, Inc.
The consent order settled charges that Cephalon's proposed acquisition of Cima Labs, Inc. would allow Cephalon to continue its monopoly in the United States market for drugs that eliminate or reduce the spikes of severe pain that chronic cancer patients experience. The consent order required Cephalon to grant Barr Laboratories, Inc. a fully paid, irrevocable license to make and sell a generic version of Cephalon's breakthrough cancer pain drug, Actiq, in the United States.