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.
Tapplock, Inc., In the Matter of
Tapplock settled FTC allegations that it deceived consumers by falsely claiming that its Internet-connected smart locks were designed to be “unbreakable” and that it took reasonable steps to secure the data it collected from users.
Jasjit Gotra (Alliance Security)
In March 2018, the FTC filed a complaint and motion for preliminary injunction alleging that Alliance Security Inc., a home security installation company, and its founder, directly and through its authorized telemarketers, called millions of consumers whose numbers are on the National Do Not Call (DNC) Registry. At the same time, two of Alliance’s authorized telemarketers and their principals agreed to settle charges that they made illegal calls on Alliance’s behalf. In August 2019, the court issued two orders against the remaining defendants in the case. The first permanently bars Alliance from telemarketing and obtaining or using consumer credit reports without written authorization. The second, a preliminary injunction, imposes the same ban on the company’s CEO and founder Jasjit “Jay” Gotra. In May 2020, the FTC announced that Gotra had settled the case against him under a court order barring him from nearly all outbound telemarketing.
I Works, Inc., et al.
The Federal Trade Commission is sending refunds to individuals who lost money to a company called I Works, which operated deceptive "trial" memberships and bogus government-grant and money-making schemes in 2010.
Buddy's Newco, LLC, In the Matter of
Rent-to-own operators Aaron’s Inc., Buddy’s Newco, LLC, and Rent-A-Center, Inc. agreed to settle FTC charges that they negotiated and executed reciprocal purchase agreements in violation of federal antitrust law. The complaints allege that from June 2015 to May 2018, Aaron’s, Buddy’s, and Rent-A-Center each entered into anticompetitive reciprocal agreements with each other and other competitors. The three proposed consent agreements prohibited the rent-to-own companies and their franchisees from entering into any reciprocal purchase agreement or inviting others to do so, and from enforcing the non-compete clauses still in effect from the past reciprocal purchase agreements. After a public comment period, the Commission announced the final consent agreements.
Aaron's Inc., In the Matter of
Rent-to-own operators Aaron’s Inc., Buddy’s Newco, LLC, and Rent-A-Center, Inc. agreed to settle FTC charges that they negotiated and executed reciprocal purchase agreements in violation of federal antitrust law. The complaints allege that from June 2015 to May 2018, Aaron’s, Buddy’s, and Rent-A-Center each entered into anticompetitive reciprocal agreements with each other and other competitors. The three proposed consent agreements prohibited the rent-to-own companies and their franchisees from entering into any reciprocal purchase agreement or inviting others to do so, and from enforcing the non-compete clauses still in effect from the past reciprocal purchase agreements. After a public comment period, the Commission announced the final consent agreements.
Rent-A-Center, Inc., In the Matter of
Rent-to-own operators Aaron’s Inc., Buddy’s Newco, LLC, and Rent-A-Center, Inc. agreed to settle FTC charges that they negotiated and executed reciprocal purchase agreements in violation of federal antitrust law. The complaints allege that from June 2015 to May 2018, Aaron’s, Buddy’s, and Rent-A-Center each entered into anticompetitive reciprocal agreements with each other and other competitors. The three proposed consent agreements prohibited the rent-to-own companies and their franchisees from entering into any reciprocal purchase agreement or inviting others to do so, and from enforcing the non-compete clauses still in effect from the past reciprocal purchase agreements. After a public comment period, the Commission announced the final consent agreements.
Dissenting Statement of Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter Regarding the Proposed Acquisition of Allergan plc by AbbVie Inc.
Statement of Chairman Joseph J. Simons, Commissioner Noah J. Phillips and Commissioner Christine S. Wilson Concerning the Proposed Acquisition of Allergan plc by AbbVie Inc.
Dissenting Statement of Commissioner Rohit Chopra In the Matter of AbbVie Inc. and Allergan plc
RevenueWire, Inc.
A Canadian company, RevenueWire, and its CEO, Roberta Leach, will pay $6.75 million to settle Federal Trade Commission charges they laundered credit card payments for, and assisted and facilitated, two tech support scams previously sued by the FTC. According to the FTC, RevenueWire entered into contracts with payment processors to obtain merchant accounts to process credit card charges for its own sales of eBooks and software. The contracts prohibited RevenueWire from submitting third-party sales through its merchant accounts. In reality, however, RevenueWire used its accounts to process credit card charges and collect payments from consumers on behalf of ICE and Vast, two companies that allegedly used tech support scams to bilk consumers out of millions of dollars.
FXI Holdings and Innocor, In the Matter of
Polyurethane foam producers FXI Holdings, Inc. and Innocor, Inc. have agreed to divest polyurethane foam pouring plants in three regional markets to Future Foam, Inc., to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that FXI’s proposed $850 million acquisition of Innocor would violate federal antitrust law. The FTC alleges that the combination of FXI and Innocor would substantially lessen competition for low-density conventional polyurethane foam used in home furnishings in three regional markets: the Pacific Northwest (Oregon and Washington); the Midwest states of Indiana, Michigan, and Ohio; and Mississippi. To remedy the proposed transaction’s anticompetitive effects, the proposed order requires the companies to divest FXI’s foam-pouring plant in Kent, Washington and Innocor’s foam-pouring plants in Elkhart, Indiana and Tupelo, Mississippi to Future Foam no later than 10 days after the close of the acquisition. On April 20, 2020, the Commission voted 5-0 to approve the final order settling the charges.