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.
Physician Integrated Services of Denver, Inc., Michael J. Guese, M.D., and Marcia L. Brauchler
Valero Energy Corporation and Ultramar Diamond Shamrock Corporation
The consent order permitted Valero to complete its $6 billion merger with Ultramar Diamond Shamrock Corporation, but required the divestiture of Ultramar's Golden Eagle Refinery, bulk gasoline contracts, and 70 Ultramar retail service stations in Northern California to a Commission-approved acquirer. According to the complaint, the merger as originally proposed, would have lessened competition in two refining markets in California resulting in consumers paying more than $150million annually if the price of CARB gasoline increased just one cent per gallon. CARB gasoline meets the specifications of the California Air Resources Board.
Hearst Trust, The, The Hearst Corporation, and First DataBank, Inc.
The Commission negotiated an agreement with The Hearst Corporation (Hearst) to settle a permanent injunction action filed by the FTC alleging that Hearst failed to provide documents required by premerger notification law and then consummated a merger that monopolized the integrated drug information database market. Under the terms of the order, Hearst divested the Medi-Span business to Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc. , a subsidiary of Wolters Kluwer, n.v., disgorged $19 million in profits, and to complied with certain other obligations.
ValueVision International, Inc.
Versatile Marketing Solutions, Inc., doing business as VMS Alarms and/or VMS
In the Matter of Pharmaceutical Pricing Investigation: Closing of Investigation
Pharmaceutical Pricing Investigation
Voice Media Inc.orporated, and Ron Levi and Paul Lesser
Statement of Commissioners Sheila F. Anthony, Orson Swindle and Thomas B. Leary Concerning Western States Gasoline Pricing Investigation
Alpine Industries, Inc. and William J. Converse
Tim Cho Investment Corp., et al.
Indigo Investment Systems, Inc.
VISX, Inc.orporated
On June 4, 1999 an administrative law judge dismissed charges against VISX, a key developer of laser eye surgery equipment and technology, known as photorefractive keratectomy (PRK). According to the 1998 administrative complaint., VISX and Summit Technology, the only two firms legally able to market equipment for PRK, placed their competing patents in a patent pool and shared the proceeds each and every time a Summit or VISX laser was used. The administrative law judge also dismissed charges that VISX acquired a key patent by inequitable conduct and fraud on the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, ruling that complaint counsel failed to present evidence that an act of fraud was committed since information was not willfully withheld from the patent office. A final order settled the price fixing allegations in the 1998 complaint. On February 7, 2001, the Commission dismissed its complaint after the U.S. patent and Trademark Office issued a Reexamination Certificate of U.S. Patent No. 5,108,388.
Valspar Corporation, The, In the Matter of
Final order permitted Valspar's acquisition of Lilly Industries, Inc., but requires Valspar to divest its mirror coatings business to Spraylet Corporation. Mirror coatings are applied to the back of a piece of glass in order to produce a mirror.