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.
Shell Oil Company and Texaco Inc.
Shell Oil and Texaco settled allegations that their proposed joint venture would reduce competition and could raise prices for gasoline in Hawaii, California, and Washington and the price of asphalt in California. The consent order requires Shell to divest a package of assets, including Shell's Anacortes, Washington refinery; a terminal and retail gasoline stations in Oahu, Hawaii and retail gas stations, and a pipeline in California.
S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc., In the Matter of
Consent order settles charges that Johnson's acquisition of Dow brands would adversely affect competition and potentially raise the prices consumers pay for soil and stain removers and glass cleaners. The consent order requires the divestiture of Dow's "Spray 'n Starch", "Spray 'n Wash", and "Glass Plus" businesses to Reckitt & Colrnan.
Guinness PLC, Grand Metropolitan PLC, and Diageo PLC, In the Matter of
The complaint accompanying the proposed consent order alleged that the merger between Guinness and Grand Metropolitan PLC would eliminate substantial competition between the two firms in the sale and distribution of premium Scotch and premium gin in the U.S. The order requires the divestiture of Dewar's Scotch, Bombay gin, and Bombay Sapphire gin brands worldwide to acquirers pre-approved by the Commission.
Callahan, Roger J., In the Matter of
London International Group, Inc., In the Matter of
National Scholastic Society, Inc. also d/b/a University Society Publishers Periodicals, and David C. Beasley, Jr
Harrell Jr., Nathaniel; and Valerie Harrell
Checkpoint Systems, Inc, In the Matter of
Foote, Cone & Belding Advertising, Inc.
Grey Advertising, Inc., In the Matter of
Rubin Postaer and Associates, Inc., In the Matter of
Sensormatic Electronics Corporation, In the Matter of
Checkpoint Systems, Inc. and Sensormatic Electronics Corporation, the two largest marketers of electronic article surveillance systems used in retail stores to prevent shoplifting, agreed to nullify and void the section of their June 1993 agreement that restricts negative advertising and promotional claims about each other's products or services. The consent order also prohibits each firm from entering into any agreement that restricts truthful, non-deceptive advertising, comparative advertising or promotional and sales activities.
Urological Stone Surgeons, Inc.; Stone Centers of America, L.L.C.; Urological Services, Ltd.; Donald M. Norris, M.D.; and Marc A. Rubenstein, M.D
Consent order settles allegations that Urological Stone Surgeons, Parkside Kidney Stone Centers, Urological Services. Ltd and two physicians engaged in a price-fixing conspiracy to raise the price for professional urologist services for lithotripsy procedures in the Chicago metropolitan area. The complaint alleges that the parties agreed to use a common billing agent, established a uniform fee for lithotripsy services, prepared and distributed fee schedules, and negotiated contracts with third party payers on behalf of all urologists using the Parkside facility. The consent order prohibits such practices in the future and requires the parties to notify the Commission at least 45 days before forming or participating in an integrated joint venture to provide lithotripsy professional services.
TRW Inc.
TRW settled antitrust allegations stemming from its acquisition of BDM, a firm that provides, among other things, systems engineering and technical services (SETA) to the Department of Defense. TRW was part of one of two teams bidding for DOD'S Ballistic Missile Defense Organization's lead system integrator program. The acquisition would have placed TRW into BDM's role of SETA contractor whereby TRW could gain sensitive competitive information, including cost and bidding information, about its only other competitor for the program. According to the complaint issued with the consent order, this situation could have resulted in less aggressive bidding and higher prices for the leading system integrator program, or put TRW in a position to favor its own team by setting unfair procurement specifications or submitting unfair proposal or performance evaluations. The consent order requires TRW to divest the SETA contract to a Commission-approved acquirer.