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.
Arise Virtual Solutions, Inc., FTC v.
The FTC is taking action against Arise Virtual Solutions for misleading consumers about the money they could make on Arise’s platform and marketing its business opportunity without complying with the FTC’s Business Opportunity Rule.
In August 2025, the FTC sent more than $6.7 million to consumers impacted by the gig work company’s deceptive earnings claims.
Click Profit, LLC
At the request of the Federal Trade Commission, a federal court temporarily halted a business opportunity scheme known as Click Profit, which took millions from consumers by falsely promising consumers that they could earn big profits through online sales.
In a complaint, the FTC alleged that Click Profit and its owners deceived consumers by promising they could make large sums in “passive income” using a proprietary system powered by artificial intelligence. The system supposedly enables consumers to sell goods through online platforms such as Amazon, Walmart, and TikTok. Click Profit also deceived consumers by claiming to be affiliated with major companies like Nike and Disney as a ploy to convince consumers to turn over tens of thousands of dollars each, according to the complaint.
In August 2025, the FTC announced that under a proposed settlement, Click Profit and its owners will be permanently banned from the industry and will be required to turn over cash, real estate, and personal property that will be used for consumer redress.
Air.ai
The FTC asked a federal court to stop Air AI from using allegedly deceptive claims about business growth, earnings potential, and refund guarantees to fleece small businesses and entrepreneurs.
LA Fitness
In August 2025, the FTC sued the operators of LA Fitness and other gyms over allegations they make it exceedingly difficult for consumers to cancel their gym memberships and related services that continued indefinitely unless cancelled. The agency is seeking a court order prohibiting the allegedly unfair conduct and money back for consumers harmed by the difficulty in cancelling memberships.
Eras/KIG
The FTC sued a ticket broker operation for allegedly using unlawful tactics to exceed ticket purchasing limits for many popular events, including Taylor Swift’s Eras Tour, and resell the tickets at significantly higher prices, generating millions in revenue. The operators include Key Investment Group and its affiliated companies, which have done business under such names as Epic Seats, TotalTickets.com LLC, and Totally Tix LLC, as well as Key Investment Group’s CEO, Yair D. Rozmaryn, Chief Financial Officer, Elan N. Rozmaryn, and Chief Strategic Officer, Taylor Kurth.
Grand Canyon University/Grand Canyon Education
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 FTC announced on August 15, 2025 it had voted to dismiss the case.
Assurance IQ, LLC
In August 2025, the FTC announce Assurance IQ, LLC and MediaAlpha, Inc. will pay a total of $145 million to settle that they misled millions of consumers seeking to buy comprehensive health insurance. The FTC alleged that both Assurance and MediaAlpha deceived consumers and led them to purchase plans that did not provide the promised health care coverage, and bombarded consumers with telemarketing and robocalls.
Match Group, Inc.
The Federal Trade Commission has sued online dating service Match Group, Inc. (Match), the owner of Match.com, Tinder, OKCupid, PlentyOfFish, and other dating sites, alleging that the company used fake love interest advertisements to trick hundreds of thousands of consumers into purchasing paid subscriptions on Match.com. The agency also alleges that Match has unfairly exposed consumers to the risk of fraud and engaged in other allegedly deceptive and unfair practices. For instance, the FTC alleges Match offered false promises of “guarantees,” failed to provide services to consumers who unsuccessfully disputed charges, and made it difficult for users to cancel their subscriptions.
Vision Online Inc. and Ganadores IBR, Inc., FTC v.
Under the terms of proposed federal court orders, several defendants in the case—including the companies behind Ganadores, the companies’ owners and managers Richard and Sara Alvarez, and an employee who played a key role in the marketing of the scheme, Bryce Chamberlain—will be permanently banned from selling ecommerce or real estate coaching services and will be required to turn over substantial assets to the FTC, which will be used to provide refunds to consumers harmed by the scam
Media/Alpha
In August 2025, the FTC announce Assurance IQ, LLC and MediaAlpha, Inc. will pay a total of $145 million to settle that they misled millions of consumers seeking to buy comprehensive health insurance. The FTC alleged that both Assurance and MediaAlpha deceived consumers and led them to purchase plans that did not provide the promised health care coverage, and bombarded consumers with telemarketing and robocalls.
FBA Machine/Passive Scaling, FTC v.
In June 2024, the FTC filed suit against FBA Machine and Bratislav Rozenfeld (also known as Steven Rozenfeld and Steven Rozen) alleging that, in a business opportunity scheme, they falsely guaranteed that consumers could make money operating online storefronts using AI-powered software. The defendants allegedly failed to deliver on the promised earnings claims and defrauded consumers out of over $15 million.
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 FTC later added Amanda Peremen, Rozenfeld’s wife, as a relief defendant in the case. The amended complaint alleged that, though not directly involved in the scheme, she received proceeds from it.
In July 2025, the FTC announced that Rozenfeld will be permanently banned from selling business opportunities in settlement of FTC’s allegations and will be required to turn over the contents of multiple financial accounts and any funds realized upon the sale of real estate property. The proceeds will be used for consumer redress.
Chase Nissan/Manchester City Nissan
The Federal Trade Commission and the State of Connecticut are taking action against auto dealer Manchester City Nissan (MCN), along with its owner and a number of key employees, for systematically deceiving consumers about the price of certified used cars, add-ons, and government fees.
The complaint alleges that the dealership, in addition to deceiving consumers, regularly charges them junk fees for certification, add-on products, and government charges without the consumers’ consent, sometimes costing them thousands of dollars in unwanted and unauthorized charges.
SL Finance
The Federal Trade Commission has stopped a pair of student loan debt relief schemes that it says bilked students out of approximately $12 million by using deceptive claims about repayment programs and loan forgiveness that did not exist. The agency also says the companies falsely claimed to be or be affiliated with the Department of Education and told students that the illegal payments the companies collected would count towards their loans.
After the FTC filed complaints seeking to end the deceptive practices, a federal court temporarily halted the two schemes and froze their assets.
In early October 2023, SL finance and BCO Consulting were permanently banned from the debt relief industry and ordered to turn over their assets as part of a settlement with the Federal Trade Commission.
In July 2025, the FTC issued more than $356,900 in payments to consumers harmed by SL Finance.