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.
Retail Services & Systems, Inc. d/b/a Total Wine & More, FTC v.
Axon Enterprise and Safariland, In the Matter of
The Federal Trade Commission issued an administrative complaint challenging Axon Enterprise, Inc.’s consummated acquisition of its body-worn camera systems competitor VieVu, LLC. Before the acquisition, the two companies competed to provide body-worn camera systems to large, metropolitan police departments across the United States. According to the complaint, Axon’s May 2018 acquisition reduced competition in an already concentrated market. Before their merger, Axon and VieVu competed to sell body-worn camera systems that were particularly well suited for large metropolitan police departments. The Commission vote to issue the administrative complaint was 5-0. On April 17, 2020, the Commission announced a proposed settlement with Safariland, which is one of the respondents and the parent company of VieVu. The final settlement was issued on June 11, 2020. The administrative trial was scheduled to begin on Oct. 13, 2020, but the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ordered a stay until further notice.
The University of Phoenix, Inc.
In December 2019, the FTC announced The University of Phoenix and its parent company agreed to pay a record $191 million to resolve allegations that they used deceptive advertisements falsely touting their relationships and job opportunities with companies such as AT&T, Yahoo!, Microsoft, Twitter, and The American Red Cross. The settlement order requires UOP to pay $50 million in cash, as well as cancel $141 million in debts owed to the school by students harmed by the deceptive ads.
In March 2021, the FTC sent payments totaling nearly $50 million to more than 147,000 UOP students who may have been lured by allegedly deceptive advertisements.
In late September 2023, the U.S. Department of Education announced that it will forgive nearly $37 million in federal loans for more than 1,200 students affected by the University of Phoenix’s deceptive practices, based in part on the FTC’s 2019 case.
Hey Dude Inc., FTC v.
In September 2023, the FTC announced online shoe retailer Hey Dude, Inc. (Hey Dude) will pay $1.95 million to settle charges that the company misled consumers by suppressing negative reviews, including more than 80 percent of reviews that failed to provide four or more stars out of a possible five. The FTC also contends the company violated the Commission’s Mail, Internet, or Telephone Order Merchandise Rule in several ways between 2020 and 2022. In August 2024, the FTC announced it was returning $1.9 million to defrauded consumers.
Statement of Chair Lina M. Khan Joined By Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter and Commissioner Alvaro Bedoya In the Matter of Amgen, Inc. and Horizon Therapeutics plc
Roomster Corp
The FTC and six states filed a lawsuit against rental listing platform Roomster Corp. and its owners John Shriber and Roman Zaks for allegedly duping consumers seeking affordable housing by paying for fake reviews and then charging for access to phony listings. Separately, the FTC and the states filed a proposed order against Jonathan Martinez—who allegedly sold Roomster tens of thousands of fake reviews—requiring him to pay $100,000 and cooperate in the FTC’s case against Roomster.
American Financial Benefits Center, et al.
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.
ConsumerInfo.com, Inc. d/b/a Experian Consumer Services, U.S. v. (Experian II)
Life Management Services, Inc.
According to a 2016 complaint brought jointly with the Florida Attorney General’s Office, the Life Management defendants bombarded consumers with illegal robocalls in attempts to sell them bogus credit card interest rate reduction services. According to the complaint, the defendants guaranteed that they could substantially and permanently lower consumers’ credit card interest rates and save them thousands of dollars in interest payments. Consumers allegedly made up-front payments but rarely, if ever, got the promised services. In December 2018, a federal judge in Florida permanently banned Kevin W. Guice from the telemarketing and debt-relief industries, agreeing with the FTC and State that he founded and operated the scam that took in over $23 million from more than 10,000 consumers, until halted by a June 2016. In July 2023, the FTC returned more than $540,000 to defrauded consumers.
Altria Group/JUUL Labs, In the Matter of
The Federal Trade Commission filed an administrative complaint alleging that Altria Group, Inc. and JUUL Labs, Inc. entered a series of agreements, including Altria’s acquisition of a 35% stake in JUUL, that eliminated competition in violation of federal antitrust laws. According to the complaint, this series of agreements involved Altria ceasing to compete in the U.S. market for closed-system electronic cigarettes in return for a substantial ownership interest in JUUL, by far the dominant player in that market. In an initial decision announced on Feb. 24, 2022, Chief Administrative Law Judge D. Michael Chappell dismissed the antitrust charges in the complaint.
Walmart, FTC v.
The Federal Trade Commission today sued Walmart for allowing its money transfer services to be used by fraudsters, who fleeced consumers out of hundreds of millions of dollars. In its lawsuit, the FTC alleges that for years, the company turned a blind eye while scammers took advantage of its failure to properly secure the money transfer services offered at Walmart stores. The company did not properly train its employees, failed to warn customers, and used procedures that allowed fraudsters to cash out at its stores, according to the FTC’s complaint. The FTC is asking the court to order Walmart to return money to consumers and to impose civil penalties for Walmart’s violations.
Walmart will pay $10 million to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that it turned a blind eye to scammers who used its in-store money transfer services to take hundreds of millions of dollars from U.S. consumers.
Elite IT Partners, Inc.
The Federal Trade Commission alleged Elite IT Partners, Inc. and its founder, President and CEO James Martinos settled FTC allegations that they tricked consumers into believing their computers were infected with viruses in order to sell them costly computer repair services.
Easy Healthcare Corporation, U.S. v.
The FTC reached a settlement with the developer of the fertility app Premom over allegations it deceived users by sharing their sensitive personal information with third parties, including two China-based firms, disclosed users’ sensitive health data to AppsFlyer and Google, and failed to notify consumers of these unauthorized disclosures in violation of the Health Breach Notification Rule (HBNR).
Cycra, Inc.
The Federal Trade Commission is taking action against motocross and ATV parts maker Cycra and its officer, Chad James, for falsely claiming that the company’s products were manufactured in the U.S. The FTC’s proposed order would stop Cycra and James from making deceptive claims about products being “Made in USA” and require them to pay a monetary judgment. In June 2023, the Commission announced the finalized order. In May 2024, the FTC sent $180,000 in refunds to consumers in this case.
Amgen Inc. and Horizon Therapeutics plc, FTC v.
Passport Automotive Group, Inc., FTC v.
The Federal Trade Commission filed a Complaint for Permanent Injunction, Monetary Relief, and Other Relief, for a permanent injunction and other relief, pursuant to Sections 5(a), 13(b), and 19 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (“FTC Act”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 45(a), 53(b), and 57b, and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (“ECOA”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1691-1691f. The Complaint charges that Defendants participated in deceptive and unfair acts or practices in violation of Section 5(a) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(a), and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (“ECOA”) and its implementing Regulation B, 12 C.F.R. § 202, in the advertising, sales, and financing of motor vehicles.
The Federal Trade Commission is sending payments totaling more than $3.3 million to customers of Passport Auto, a Washington D.C.-area auto dealer. In October 2022, the FTC charged Passport with adding hundreds, or even thousands, of dollars in illegal junk fees to car prices and for discriminating against Black and Latino consumers by charging them higher fees and financing costs.