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.
Dissenting Statement of Commissioner Rohit Chopra Regarding Zoom Video Communications, Inc.
Sunday Riley Modern Skincare, LLC; In the Matter of
On October 21, 2019, the FTC announced it had halted the deceptive online marketing tactics of cosmetics firm Sunday Riley Modern Skincare, LLC and its CEO. Under the order settling the FTC’s complaint the defendants were banned from misleading consumers by posting fake reviews of the company’s products on a major retailer’s website, at the CEO’s direction, and by failing to disclose that the reviewers were company employees. The FTC announced approval of the final order in November 2020.
Statement of Commissioner Christine S. Wilson in the Matter of Pfizer Inc./Mylan N.V.
Dissenting Statement of Commissioner Rohit Chopra Joined by Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter in the Matter of Pfizer Inc./Mylan N.V.
NTT Global Data Centers Americas, Inc., In the Matter of
The FTC sued RagingWire Data Centers, Inc. over allegations that the company misled consumers about its participation in the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield framework and failed to adhere to the program’s requirements before allowing its certification to lapse. A proposed consent agreement that would settle those allegations was announced on June 30, 2020.
Outreach Calling, Inc.
A sprawling fundraising operation that allegedly scammed consumers out of millions of dollars will be permanently banned from charitable fundraising along with its owner and others involved in its operation as a result of a lawsuit brought by the Federal Trade Commission and Attorneys General of New York, Virginia, Minnesota, and New Jersey.
The operation is made up of multiple companies all under the control of owner Mark Gelvan, along with his associates Thomas Berkenbush, William English, and Damian Muziani. The complaint filed by the FTC and the states alleges that the defendants served as the primary fundraisers for a number of sham charities that were the subject of numerous law enforcement actions.
Little Spoon, Inc. (Little Spoon baby food)
NutraClick, LLC, et al.
In September 2016, nutritional supplement marketer NutraClick agreed to settle FTC charges that it lured consumers with “free” samples of supplements and beauty products and then violated the law by charging them a recurring monthly fee without their consent. Four years later, in September 2020, the FTC filed a complaint alleging the company and its two principals were continuing to deceptively market their products, in violation of the FTC order. The settlement order, announced simultaneously with the complaint, bans the defendants from negative option marketing and requires them to pay more than $1 million for consumer redress.
GeerPres, Inc. (ADVANTAX microfiber mop pads)
Elanco Animal Health and Bayer
In July 2020, the FTC required global suppliers of animal products, Elanco Animal Health, Inc. and Bayer Animal Health GmbH, to divest three animal health products to settle charges that Elanco’s proposed $7.6 billion acquisition of Bayer would likely be anticompetitive in those markets. On Sept. 11, 2020, the Commission announced the final consent agreement in this matter.
OMICS Group Inc.
In April 2019, the FTC announced that a federal district court judge ordered Srinubabu Gedela and his companies to pay more than $50.1 million to resolve FTC charges that they made deceptive claims about the nature of their conferences and publications, and hid steep publication fees. The court ruling resolved a 2016 Commission complaint alleging that Gedela and the companies falsely advertised online scientific and medical academic journals and international conferences, and deceptively claimed the journals provided authors with rigorous peer review and editorial boards comprised of prominent academics.