Legal Library: Cases and Proceedings

The operators of two purported sham charities have agreed to settle charges by the FTC and the AGs of Missouri and Florida that they deceived donors with false claims that their organizations helped disabled police officers and military veterans. The operators of both schemes are permanently banned from charitable solicitations or otherwise working for charities.

The FTC is mailing 270 checks totaling nearly $515,000 to consumers who paid for what the agency alleged was deceptively advertised “amniotic stem cell therapy” between 2014 and 2017. The average amount each consumer will receive is $1,907.

Unixiz, Inc., doing business as i-Dressup.com, and the individually named defendants CEO Zhijun Liu and Secretary Xichen Zhang, reached a settlement over allegations they violated the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA).

Following public comment periods, the Federal Trade Commission has approved final consent orders in two separate cases in which the agency alleged that companies falsely claimed their products were made in the United States. The companies were Sandpiper of California and Underground Sports Inc.

Following public comment periods, the Federal Trade Commission has approved final consent orders in two separate cases in which the agency alleged that companies falsely claimed their products were made in the United States. The companies were Sandpiper of California and Underground Sports Inc.

The Federal Trade Commission mailed checks totaling nearly $1.1 million to 87,256 consumers who paid for work-at-home opportunities based on the allegedly deceptive advertising practices of Bob Robinson, LLC and other related defendants. The defendants operated under various brand names, including Work At Home EDU, Work At Home Program, Work At Home Ecademy, Work At Home University, Work At Home Revenue, and Work at Home Institute.

Thomas Wells and his payment processing company, Priority Payout Corp. (formerly known as InterBill, Ltd), have agreed to settle FTC charges that they repeatedly violated a 2009 court order issued against them. The settlement permanently bans Wells and Priority Payout Corp, from engaging in, and assisting others with, payment processing, and includes a $1.8 million contempt judgment against them.

The FTC required healthcare companies Fresenius Medical Care AG & KGaA and NxStage Medical, Inc. to divest all rights and assets related to NxStage’s bloodline tubing set business to B. Braun Medical, Inc. as part of a settlement resolving charges that Fresenius’s proposed $2 billion acquisition of NxStage likely would be anticompetitive. The FTC’s complaint alleges that the proposed merger would harm competition in the U.S. market for bloodline tubing sets that are compatible with hemodialysis machines used in clinics that treat chronic renal failure. Bloodline tubing sets are single-use plastic tube sets used during hemodialysis treatments. Fresenius and NxStage are two of only three significant suppliers of bloodline tubing sets used in open architecture hemodialysis machines in the United States. Fresenius and NxStage together control 82 percent of the market for bloodlines.The settlement requires Fresenius and NxStage to divest to B. Braun all assets and rights to research, develop, manufacture, market, and sell NxStage’s bloodline tubing sets.

Four separate operations responsible for bombarding consumers nationwide with billions of unwanted and illegal robocalls pitching auto warranties, debt-relief services, home security systems, fake charities, and Google search results services have agreed to settle FTC charges that they violated the FTC Act and the agency’s Telemarketing Sales Rule (TSR), including its Do Not Call (DNC) provisions.

The operators of two purported sham charities have agreed to settle charges by the FTC and the AGs of Missouri and Florida that they deceived donors with false claims that their organizations helped disabled police officers and military veterans. The operators of both schemes are permanently banned from charitable solicitations or otherwise working for charities.

Four separate operations responsible for bombarding consumers nationwide with billions of unwanted and illegal robocalls pitching auto warranties, debt-relief services, home security systems, fake charities, and Google search results services have agreed to settle FTC charges that they violated the FTC Act and the agency’s Telemarketing Sales Rule (TSR), including its Do Not Call (DNC) provisions.

Four separate operations responsible for bombarding consumers nationwide with billions of unwanted and illegal robocalls pitching auto warranties, debt-relief services, home security systems, fake charities, and Google search results services have agreed to settle FTC charges that they violated the FTC Act and the agency’s Telemarketing Sales Rule (TSR), including its Do Not Call (DNC) provisions.

The Federal Trade Commission is sending refund checks totaling more than $7 million to people deceived by the operators of an alleged business opportunity fraud that targeted seniors and others living on a fixed income. The refunds stem from a settlement the FTC reached in 2017 with Advertising Strategies, LLC, under which the defendants surrendered virtually all their assets to provide consumer refunds.

The FTC filed a lawsuit in federal court to stop a dietary supplement marketer from making misleading claims that its product can help treat and even cure people who are addicted to opiates, including prescription pain medications and illegal drugs such as heroin.

On 2/2/2009, the Commission filed a complaint in federal district court challenging and agreement between Solvay Pharmaceuticals and two generic drug manufacturers in which Solvay paid for the delayed release of generic equivalents to its own testosterone-replacement drug, AndroGel, typically used in the treatment of men with low testosterone levels due to advanced age, certain cancers, and HIV/AIDS. According to the Commission’s complaint, in an effort to prevent Watson Pharmaceuticals and Par Pharmaceuticals from acquiring patents for their competing testosterone replacement drugs, Solvay paid the companies to delay entry for a nine year period, ending in 2015. 

This case was transferred from the United States District Court for the Central District of California to the Northern District of Georgia.  The district court dismissed the Commission's complaint, and the Eleventh Circuit affirmed, holding that anticompetitive effects within the scope of patent protection are per se legal under the antitrust laws.

On 10/4/2012, the FTC filed a writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court.  On June 17, 2013, the Supreme Court reversed the 11th Circuit, rejecting the scope of the patent test and permitting antitrust review of reverse payment patent settlement agreements.

There are three related administrative proceedings:

• Watson Pharmaceuticals / Actavis Inc.
• Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a corporation, and Robin Hood Holdings Limited, a limited liability company
• Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Andrx Corporation

Video social networking app Musical.ly, Inc., now known as TikTok, agreed to pay $5.7 million to settle Federal Trade Commission allegations that the company illegally collected personal information from children in violation of the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act. 

The FTC's complaint alleges that Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. and several other drug companies violated antitrust laws by using pay-for-delay settlements to block consumers’ access to lower-cost generic versions of Lidoderm.  The agreement not to market an authorized generic – often called a “no-AG commitment” – is the form of reverse payment.  The FTC’s complaint alleges that Endo paid the first generic companies that filed for FDA approval – Watson Laboratories, Inc. – to eliminate the risk of competition for Lidoderm, in violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act.  Lidoderm is a topical patch used to relieve pain associated with post-herpetic neuralgia, a complication of shingles.  Under federal law, the first generic applicant to challenge a branded pharmaceutical’s patent, referred to as the first filer, may be entitled to 180 days of exclusivity as against any other generic applicant upon final FDA approval. But a branded drug manufacturer is permitted to market an authorized generic version of its own brand product at any time, including during the 180 days after the first generic competitor enters the market. According to the FTC, a no-AG commitment can be extremely valuable to the first-filer generic, because it ensures that this company will capture all generic sales and be able to charge higher prices during the exclusivity period.  The FTC is seeking a court judgment declaring that the defendants’ conduct violates the antitrust laws, ordering the companies to disgorge their ill-gotten gains, and permanently barring them from engaging in similar anticompetitive behavior in the future.

Endo agreed to settle the charges in a proposed stipulated order to be entered by the court.