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.
EduTrek, LLC
The Federal Trade Commission has charged a telemarketing operation and its owners with making millions of illegal, unsolicited calls about educational programs to consumers who submitted their contact information to websites promising help with job searches, public benefits, and other unrelated programs.
In early September 2023, a federal judge in Illinois ruled in the FTC’s favor, finding that the defendants made millions of illegal, unsolicited calls to consumers on the Do Not Call Registry. In granting summary judgment, the court found that the FTC was entitled to both injunctive relief and civil penalties and has scheduled a hearing to determine the amount of the civil penalty award and the scope of injunctive relief.
A federal district court entered final orders against a telemarketing company and its owners, who made millions of illegal, unsolicited calls to people that were registered on the Do Not Call Registry. The court ordered the defendants to pay $28.7 million in civil penalties and permanently banned the defendants from participating in telemarketing or assisting and facilitating others engaged in telemarketing to consumers.
Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc./Amneal Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
The FTC is suing Endo Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Endo International plc, Impax Laboratories, LLC, and Impax’s owner, Amneal Pharmaceuticals, Inc., alleging that a 2017 agreement between Endo and Impax violated the antitrust laws by eliminating competition in the market for oxymorphone ER. The complaint charges the defendants with violating Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act, which constitutes unfair methods of competition in violation of Section 5 of the FTC Act. Specifically, Endo, Impax, and Amneal are charged with entering into an illegal agreement in restraint of trade, and Amneal is charged with monopolization of the oxymorphone ER market. The complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Jan. 25, 2021.
Concurring Statement from Commissioner Wilson Regarding BetterHelp
Buckeye/Magellan, In the Matter of
The Federal Trade Commission required energy pipeline and storage companies Buckeye Partners, L.P. and Magellan Midstream Partners, L.P. to divest to U.S. Venture, Inc. petroleum terminals in the two states as a condition of Buckeye’s $435 million proposed acquisition of 26 Magellan terminals. The complaint alleged that without a remedy, the acquisition would harm competition for terminaling services both for all LPPs, and for gasoline specifically, in North Augusta, South Carolina; Spartanburg, South Carolina; and Montgomery, Alabama. The complaint alleged that in all three geographic markets, the acquisition would eliminate the close competition between Buckeye and Magellan, increase the likelihood of collusive or coordinated interaction between the remaining competitors, reduce the number of terminaling options for third-party customers, and increase prices for terminaling services. On Aug. 9, 2022, the Commission announced the final consent agreement in this matter.
American Securities Partners/Ferro, In the Matter of
The Federal Trade Commission has required Prince International Corp. and Ferro Corp. to divest three facilities used to make porcelain enamel frit, glass enamel, and forehearth colorants, as a condition of Prince’s parent company – American Securities Partners VII, L.P. – acquiring competitor Ferro Corp. for $2.1 billion. According to the complaint, the acquisition as proposed likely would allow the merged firm to unilaterally raise prices for porcelain enamel frit in the North American market, and for forehearth colorants in the world market. It also would eliminate Prince as an independent competitor in the world market for glass enamel, increasing the likelihood of coordination between the merged firm and its largest competitor, Fenzi Holdings SPV S.p.A. On July 5, 2022, the Commission announced the final consent agreement in this matter.
Lead Express, Inc. (Harvest Moon Financial)
The owners and operators of a vast payday lending scheme that overcharged consumers millions of dollars will be permanently banned from the lending industry under the terms of a settlement with the Federal Trade Commission. The settlement also provides that nearly all outstanding debt—made up entirely of illegal finance charges—held by the company will be deemed as paid in full.
The FTC charged the enterprise with deceptively overcharging consumers millions of dollars and withdrawing money repeatedly from consumers’ bank accounts without their permission.
The Federal Trade Commission is sending 26,698 checks totaling more than $970,000 to consumers who were harmed by a deceptive payday lending scheme that operated under the names Harvest Moon Financial, Gentle Breeze Online, and Green Stream Lending.
R360, FTC v.
In May 2022, the FTC took action against R360 LLC and its owner, Steven Doumar, for deceiving people seeking help for addiction about the evaluation and selection criteria for the treatment centers in their network. The case is the FTC’s first under the Opioid Addiction Recovery Fraud Prevention Act of 2018. The agency secured a $3.8 million civil penalty judgment against the defendants and an order prohibiting them from continuing to make the same kinds of misrepresentations.
AdvoCare International, L.P.
Multi-level marketer AdvoCare International, L P and its former chief executive officer agreed to pay $150 million and be banned from the multi-level marketing business to resolve Federal Trade Commission charges that the company operated an illegal pyramid scheme that deceived consumers into believing that they could earn significant income as "distributors" of its health and wellness products. Two top promoters also settled charges that they promoted the illegal pyramid scheme and misled consumers about their income potential, agreeing to a multi-level marketing ban and a judgment of $4 million that will be suspended when they surrender substantial assets.
Jason Cardiff (Redwood Scientific Technologies, Inc.)
The FTC’s October 2018 complaint against Redwood Scientific charged the defendants with a scheme that used illegal robocalls to deceptively market dissolvable oral film strips as effective smoking cessation, weight-loss, and sexual-performance aids. Announced in June 2019 as part of a crackdown on illegal robocalls against operations around the country responsible for more than one billion calls, an initial settlement resolved the FTC’s charges against one defendant in the Redwood Scientific case, Danielle Cadiz. The order permanently banned Cadiz from all robocall activities, including ringless voicemails, and imposes a judgment of $18.2 million against Cadiz. In March 2022, the FTC announced the final court orders against all remaining defendants.
Hornbeam Special Situations, LLC
A payment processing company that allegedly helped a bogus discount club scheme debit tens of millions of dollars from consumers without authorization will be required to pay $2.3 million and face a permanent ban from working with high-risk clients as a result of a Federal Trade Commission lawsuit.
According to the FTC’s complaint in the case, which was first filed in 2017, iStream Financial Services and its senior officers, Kris Axberg and Richard Joachim, allegedly debited money from consumers who were seeking payday or cash advance loans, but were enrolled in a bogus coupon service and charged initial fees up to almost $100 plus as much as $19.95 each month. Consumers were enrolled in the discount club scheme online and through outbound telemarketing.
Global Partners/Fuel Assets
Global Partners LP and Richard Wiehl have agreed to divest to Petroleum Marketing Investment Group, LLC, seven stores that sell gasoline and diesel fuel in five local markets in Connecticut, to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that Global’s proposed acquisition of 27 retail gasoline and diesel outlets owned or operated by Wiehl violates federal antitrust laws. The complaint alleges that the acquisition will harm competition for the retail sale of gasoline in and around the Connecticut towns and cities of Fairfield, Bethel, Milford, Wilton, and Shelton. In all of these local markets except Wilton, the acquisition will also harm competition for the retail sale of diesel fuel. Under the terms of the proposed consent order, among other stipulations, Global and Wiehl must divest to Petroleum Marketing Investment Group six Global retail fuel outlets and one Wheels retail fuel outlet. On March 3, 2022, the Commission announced the final consent agreement in this matter.
Global Partners and Richard Wiehl, In the Matter of
Global Partners LP and Richard Wiehl have agreed to divest to Petroleum Marketing Investment Group, LLC, seven stores that sell gasoline and diesel fuel in five local markets in Connecticut, to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that Global’s proposed acquisition of 27 retail gasoline and diesel outlets owned or operated by Wiehl violates federal antitrust laws. The complaint alleges that the acquisition will harm competition for the retail sale of gasoline in and around the Connecticut towns and cities of Fairfield, Bethel, Milford, Wilton, and Shelton. In all of these local markets except Wilton, the acquisition will also harm competition for the retail sale of diesel fuel. Under the terms of the proposed consent order, among other stipulations, Global and Wiehl must divest to Petroleum Marketing Investment Group six Global retail fuel outlets and one Wheels retail fuel outlet.
National Landmark Logistics, LLC
The FTC alleged that this company and its operators collected more than $12 million from consumers through illegal debt collection practices. The FTC’s complaint alleges that the defendants used robocalls to leave deceptive messages claiming consumers faced imminent legal action about debts. When consumers returned the calls, the defendants falsely claimed to be from a mediation or law firm, again threatened legal action, and used consumers’ personal information to convince consumers the threats were real. The complaint alleges that, in many instances, consumers did not owe the debt being collected on or the defendants had no right to collect it.
Under the terms of a settlement, National Landmark Logistics, LLC; National Landmark Service of United Recovery, LLC; Silverlake Landmark Recovery Group, LLC; and Jean Cellent will be permanently banned from debt collection of any kind. They will also be banned from buying or selling debt, and from making any misrepresentations to consumers about any goods or services—including from claiming that they are lawyers or represent a law firm.
In addition, the defendants will be required to surrender the contents of numerous bank and investment accounts, as well as the title to property located in Philadelphia and a Mercedes SL 550 or the cash value of those assets.
In December 2024, the FTC sent more than $540,000 in refunds to consumers who paid a group of abusive debt collectors who threatened consumers with lawsuits or arrest if they failed to pay debt that they might not have even owed.
Agora Financial LLC
The FTC sued a publisher called Agora Financial, LLC, alleging that it tricks seniors into buying books, newsletters, and other publications that falsely promise a cure for type 2 diabetes or promote a phony plan to help them cash in on a government-affiliated check program. According to the FTC’s complaint, Agora Financial and some of its affiliates target publications, including The Doctor’s Guide to Reversing Diabetes in 28 Days (The Doctor’s Guide), primarily at older consumers nationwide, as well as pitching them on a fake scheme to cash in on Congress’ Secret $1.17 Trillion Giveaway. The FTC announced a proposed order settling the allegations against all defendants in February 2021.
Statement of CFPB Director Rohit Chopra and FTC Chair Lina M. Khan on Amicus Brief in Henderson v. The Source for Public Data, L.P.
Grand Bahama Cruise Line, LLC
In January 2020, three people and a telephone call center that helped Florida-based Grand Bahama Cruise Line LLC (GBCL) and others to make millions of illegal robocalls to consumers settled an FTC complaint and are permanently barred from making telemarketing robocalls. The FTC will litigate in federal court against GBCL and six other defendants involved in the massive operation, who have not agreed to settle. The FTC announced a settlement with the seven remaining defendants in September 2021.
Fleetcor Technologies
The Federal Trade Commission’s complaint against FleetCor, a company that sells fuel card services to businesses, alleges that it has charged customers at least hundreds of millions of dollars in hidden fees after making false promises about helping customers save on fuel costs. The case was filed in December 2019.
Absolute Financial Services, LLC
The FTC alleged that this company and its operators collected more than $5.2 million from consumers through illegal debt collection practices. In its complaint, the FTC alleged that the company used the defendants in the National Landmark Logistics case to place deceptive robocalls alleging that consumers owed debt and faced legal action if they did not reply. Once consumers called the defendants after receiving the message, the defendants often falsely claimed to be representing a law firm or threatened consumers with arrest if they did not immediately pay the debt.
Under the terms of their settlements, Lashone Elam (also known as Lashone Caldwell); Absolute Financial Services, LLC; Absolute Financial Services Recovery, LLC; AFSR Global Logistics, LLC; and Talesia Neely will be permanently banned from playing any role in debt collection.
They will also be prohibited from making certain misrepresentations to consumers, including whether a consumer owes them a payment, whether they are attorneys or associated with a law firm, or the terms of any refund program.