Legal Library: Cases and Proceedings

The Federal Trade Commission sued to stop four related defendants from deceptively marketing their 1 Virus Buster Invisible Mask (Invisible Mask) that purportedly creates a three-foot barrier of protection against 99.9 percent of all viruses and bacteria, including COVID-19 – without any scientific proof that the product actually works.

The FTC obtained an order against education technology provider Edmodo for collecting personal data from children without obtaining their parent’s consent and using that data for advertising, in violation of the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act Rule (COPPA Rule), and for unlawfully outsourcing its COPPA compliance responsibilities to schools. 

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.

The FTC sued the health information company Surescripts, alleging that the company employed illegal vertical and horizontal restraints in order to maintain its monopolies over two electronic prescribing, or “e-prescribing,” markets: routing and eligibility.  According to the complaint, Surescripts monopolized two separate markets for e-prescription services: The market for routing e-prescriptions, which uses technology that enables health care providers to send electronic prescriptions directly to pharmacies; and the market for determining eligibility, a separate service that enables health care providers to electronically determine patients’ eligibility for prescription coverage through access to insurance coverage and benefits information, usually through a pharmacy benefit manager.The FTC alleges that Surescripts intentionally set out to keep e-prescription routing and eligibility customers on both sides of each market from using additional platforms (a practice known as multihoming) using anticompetitive exclusivity agreements, threats, and other exclusionary tactics. Among other things, the FTC alleges that Surescripts took steps to increase the costs of routing and eligibility multihoming through loyalty and exclusivity contracts.

In July 2023, the FTC filed a proposed order that would resolve the Commission’s charges. The proposed order prohibits Surescripts from engaging in exclusionary conduct and executing or enforcing non-compete agreements with current and former employees. The proposed order also goes beyond routing and eligibility, extending the same prohibitions to Surescripts’ medication history services and the company’s on-demand formulary services.

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).

In February 2022, the FTC took action in federal court against a Florida-based group of defendants it alleges called hundreds of thousands of consumers nationwide to pitch them expensive “extended automobile warranties” using deceptive telemarketing tactics. According to the FTC complaint, American Vehicle Protection Corp. and related defendants bilked consumers out of more than $6 million over the last four years.  Under the terms of proposed court orders, three companies and their owners that were charged by the FTC with running the operation that scammed consumers out of millions of dollars would be permanently banned from participating in the extended automobile warranty market, as well as from any further involvement in outbound telemarketing. An additional court order announced in July 2023 bans an additional corporate defendant and its owner.

The Federal Trade Commission is sending more than $449,000 in refunds to consumers who were harmed by American Vehicle Protection Corp., which engaged in a telemarketing scam that involved calling hundreds of thousands of consumers nationwide to pitch expensive “extended automobile warranties” using deceptive telemarketing tactics.

Microsoft will pay $20 million to settle FTC charges that it violated COPPA by collecting personal information from children who signed up to its Xbox gaming system without notifying their parents or obtaining their parents’ consent, and by illegally retaining children’s personal information.

The operators of a worldwide negative option scam have agreed to settle FTC charges that they deceptively advertised “risk-free” trial offers for only the cost of shipping and handling, but then charged consumers full price for the trial product and enrolled them in expensive, ongoing continuity plans without their knowledge or consent.

The FTC taking action against education technology provider Chegg Inc. for its lax data security practices that exposed sensitive information about millions of its customers and employees, including Social Security numbers, email addresses and passwords.

7-Eleven, Inc. and Marathon Petroleum Corporation have agreed to divest retail fuel assets used to sell gasoline and diesel fuel in 293 local markets across 20 states, to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that 7-Eleven’s acquisition of Marathon’s Speedway subsidiary violated federal antitrust laws. The complaint alleges that the acquisition will harm competition for the retail sale of fuel in 293 local markets across Arizona; California; Florida; Illinois; Indiana; Kentucky; Massachusetts; Michigan; North Carolina; New Hampshire; Nevada; New York; Ohio; Pennsylvania; Rhode Island; South Carolina; Tennessee; Utah; Virginia, and West Virginia. In addition to the divestitures, the proposed order prohibits 7-Eleven from enforcing any noncompete provisions as to any franchisees or employees working at or doing business with the divested assets. On November 10, 2021, the Commission announced the final consent agreement in this matter.

The Federal Trade Commission sued 7-Eleven, Inc and its parent company, Seven & i Holdings Co., Ltd., alleging the convenience store chain violated a 2018 FTC consent order by acquiring a fuel outlet in St. Petersburg, Fla. without providing the Commission prior notice.

The Federal Trade Commission has taken action against a for-profit medical school in the Caribbean and its Illinois-based operators, alleging they deceptively marketed the school’s medical license exam test pass rate and residency matches to lure prospective students. The school and its operators are also charged with violating the Holder Rule, which preserves rights for injured consumers, and the Credit Practices Rule, which protects consumers in credit contracts. The $1.2 million judgment against Saint James School of Medicine and its operators will go toward refunds and debt cancellation for students harmed by the deceptive marketing.

The Federal Trade Commission is returning more than $10 million to consumers who were charged undisclosed fees by online lender LendingClub Corporation. The FTC is distributing refunds directly to more than 15,000 LendingClub customers and encouraging additional LendingClub customers to apply for refunds.

The FTC sued LendingClub in April 2018, charging that the company falsely promised loan applicants that they would receive a specific loan amount with “no hidden fees,” when in reality the company deducted hundreds or even thousands of dollars in hidden up-front fees from the loans. The FTC also alleged that LendingClub told consumers they were approved for loans when they were not and took money from consumers’ bank accounts without authorization.

The Federal Trade Commission is sending payments totaling more than $9.7 million to 61,990 consumers who were charged hidden fees by LendingClub Corporation.

These payments are the result of a claims process conducted by the FTC in February 2022. It is the second distribution of funds in this matter and brings the total amount refunded to consumers to more than $17.6 million.

The Federal Trade Commission required ARKO Corp. and its subsidiary GPM to roll back anticompetitive provisions of their acquisition of 60 Express Stop retail fuel outlets from Corrigan Oil Company last year. The complaint alleged that as originally proposed, the agreement not to compete that ARKO and GPM required Corrigan to sign as part of the acquisition harmed customers in local retail gasoline and retail diesel fuel markets throughout Michigan and Ohio. The order required them to amend a non-compete agreement they imposed on Corrigan, agree to obtain prior approval from the Commission before acquiring retail fuel assets under certain circumstances, and return to Corrigan five retail fuel outlets, among other provisions.  On Aug. 9, 2022, the Commission announced the final consent agreement in this matter.

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.