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.
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.
Research & Mfg. Corp. of America, d/b/a Ramcoa
Statement of Chair Lina M. Khan, Joined by Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter and Commissioner Alvaro M. Bedoya, in the Matter of EQT Corporation
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).
American Vehicle Protection Corporation
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 Corporation, U.S. v.
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.
Triangle Media Corporation
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.
Dissenting Statement of Commissioner Christine S. Wilson In the Matter of Anchor Glass Container Corp
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.
doTERRA - Bacot
The Federal Trade Commission has brought lawsuits against three current and former high-level distributors – so-called “Wellness Advocates” – of the Utah-based multi-level marketing company doTERRA International, LLC, for making claims that the company’s essential oils and dietary supplements could treat, prevent, or cure COVID-19. The distributors, all current or former healthcare practitioners, made the claims in a series of webinars in early 2022 and touted their medical expertise in recommending the products.
The three complaints, filed by the Department of Justice on behalf of the FTC, allege that the defendants made numerous claims about the ability of various doTERRA products to prevent, treat, or cure COVID-19, in violation of the FTC Act and the COVID-19 Consumer Protection Act.
doTERRA - Busch
The Federal Trade Commission has brought lawsuits against three current and former high-level distributors – so-called “Wellness Advocates” – of the Utah-based multi-level marketing company doTERRA International, LLC, for making claims that the company’s essential oils and dietary supplements could treat, prevent, or cure COVID-19. The distributors, all current or former healthcare practitioners, made the claims in a series of webinars in early 2022 and touted their medical expertise in recommending the products.
The three complaints, filed by the Department of Justice on behalf of the FTC, allege that the defendants made numerous claims about the ability of various doTERRA products to prevent, treat, or cure COVID-19, in violation of the FTC Act and the COVID-19 Consumer Protection Act.
doTERRA - Wong
The Federal Trade Commission has brought lawsuits against three current and former high-level distributors – so-called “Wellness Advocates” – of the Utah-based multi-level marketing company doTERRA International, LLC, for making claims that the company’s essential oils and dietary supplements could treat, prevent, or cure COVID-19. The distributors, all current or former healthcare practitioners, made the claims in a series of webinars in early 2022 and touted their medical expertise in recommending the products.
The three complaints, filed by the Department of Justice on behalf of the FTC, allege that the defendants made numerous claims about the ability of various doTERRA products to prevent, treat, or cure COVID-19, in violation of the FTC Act and the COVID-19 Consumer Protection Act.
Seven & i Holdings Co., Ltd., In the Matter of
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.
Superior Products International II, Inc.
The Federal Trade Commission sued Superior Products International II, Inc., and its principal Joseph Pritchett, alleging they make false or unsubstantiated R-value and energy savings claims about their architectural coatings products. In July 2020, the FTC sued four companies that sell paint products used to coat buildings and homes, alleging that they deceived consumers about their products’ insulation and energy-savings capabilities. In complaints filed in federal court, the FTC charged that the companies falsely overstated the R-value ratings of the coatings, making deceptive statements about heat flow and insulating power. The FTC announced a summary judgment against the defendants in November 2022.
LendingClub Corporation
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.
ARKO/GPM Investments, In the Matter of
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.
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.