Legal Library: Cases and Proceedings

In May 2020, the FTC sued the operators of a Pennsylvania-based telemarketing scheme, alleging that they charged organizations such as businesses, schools, fire and police departments, and non-profits for books and newsletter subscriptions they never ordered. The agency’s complaint also names the defendants behind a New York-based debt collection operation, alleging that they illegally threatened the organizations if they failed to pay for the unordered merchandise.

In April 2023, International Credit Recovery, Inc. (ICR), officer Richard Diorio, Jr., and manager Cynthia Powell, have agreed to a permanent ban from the debt collection industry after being charged with engaging in bogus debt collection efforts against businesses and non-profits.

In March 2024, the district court ruled against the FTC on its claims. In June 2024, the district court denied the FTC's post-trial motion to alter or amend judgment.

In January 2023, the FTC issued an order requiring Ohio-based LCA-Vision, doing business as LasikPlus and Joffe MediCenter, to pay $1.25 million for using deceptive bait-and-switch advertising to trick consumers into believing they could have their vision corrected for less than $300. The order also bans the defendants from making the misrepresentations detailed in the complaint. The Commission approved the final consent order in March 2023. In October 2024, the FTC announced it was returning $1.1 million to defrauded consumers.

The Federal Trade Commission has taken action against Instant Brands, manufacturer of Pyrex-brand kitchen and home products, for falsely claiming that all its popular glass measuring cups were made in the United States during a time some measuring cups were imported from China. The FTC’s proposed order against Instant Brands would stop the company from making deceptive claims about products being “Made in USA” and require them to pay a monetary judgment.

The Federal Trade Commission is sending more than $88,000 in refunds to consumers who bought Chinese-made measuring cups marketed as “Made in USA” by Instant Brands, the maker of Pyrex-brand kitchen and home products.

The FTC alleges that Grand Canyon Education (GCE), Inc., Grand Canyon University (GCU) and Brian Mueller—the CEO of GCE and president of GCU—deceived prospective doctoral students about the cost and course requirements of its doctoral programs and about being a nonprofit, while also engaging in deceptive and abusive telemarketing practices.

The Federal Trade Commission is taking action against Invitation Homes, the country’s largest landlord of single-family homes, for an array of unlawful actions against consumers, including deceiving renters about lease costs, charging undisclosed junk fees, failing to inspect homes before residents moved in, and unfairly withholding tenants’ security deposits when they moved out.

Invitation Homes has agreed to a proposed settlement order that would require the company to turn over $48 million to be used to refund consumers harmed by its actions. The corporate landlord will also be required to clearly disclose its leasing prices, establish policies and procedures to handle security deposit refunds fairly, and stop other unlawful behavior.

According to the FTC’s complaint, Rytr’s service generated detailed reviews that contained specific, often material details that had no relation to the user’s input, and these reviews almost certainly would be false for the users who copied them and published them online. In many cases, subscribers’ AI-generated reviews featured information that would deceive potential consumers who were using the reviews to make purchasing decisions. The complaint further alleges that at least some of Rytr’s subscribers used the service to produce hundreds, and in some cases tens of thousands, of reviews potentially containing false information.

The proposed order settling the Commission’s complaint is designed to prevent Rytr from engaging in similar illegal conduct in the future. It would bar the company from advertising, promoting, marketing, or selling any service dedicated to – or promoted as – generating consumer reviews or testimonials. 

The FTC took action against a business opportunity scheme that allegedly falsely promised consumers that they would make guaranteed income through online storefronts that utilized AI-powered software. According to the FTC, the scheme, which has operated under the names Passive Scaling and FBA Machine, cost consumers more than $15.9 million based on deceptive earnings claims that rarely, if ever, materialize.

As a result of the FTC’s complaint, a federal court issued an order temporarily halting the scheme and putting it under the control of a receiver. The case against the scheme is still under way and will be decided by a federal court. 

The FTC is taking action against DoNotPay, a company that claimed to offer an AI service that was “the world’s first robot lawyer,” but the product failed to live up to its lofty claims that the service could substitute for the expertise of a human lawyer.

DoNotPay has agreed to a proposed Commission order settling the charges against it. The settlement would require it to pay $193,000, provide a notice to consumers who subscribed to the service between 2021 and 2023 warning them about the limitations of law-related features on the service. The proposed order also will prohibit the company from making claims about its ability to substitute for any professional service without evidence to back it up. 

In January, 2025, the Commission finalized an order requiring DoNotPay to stop making deceptive claims about the abilities of its AI chatbot.

In July 2024, NRRM, LLC, which does business as CarShield, along with American Auto Shield, LLC, the administrator of its vehicle service contracts, agreed to pay $10 million to settle FTC charges that its advertisements and telemarketing for VSC are deceptive and misleading, and that many purchasers found that many repairs were not “covered,” despite making payments of up to $120 per month. The FTC also alleges CarShield’s celebrity and consumer endorsers made false statements in its ads.