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.
Sterling Precious Metals, LLC, et al.
Jesta Digital, LLC, also d/b/a Jamster
Direct Benefits Group, LLC, et al.
Nelson Gamble & Associates LLC, et al.
Motorola Mobility LLC, and Google Inc., In the Matter of
To settle charges that it violated Section 5 of the FTC Act by engaging in unfair methods of competition and unfair acts or practices related to the licensing of standard essential patents (SEPs) for cellular, video codec, and wireless LAN stanards, Google Inc. agreed to change some of its business practices. Under a settlement reached with the FTC, Google agreed to meet its prior commitments to allow competitors access – on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms – to patents on critical standardized technologies needed to make popular devices such as smart phones, laptop and tablet computers, and gaming consoles.
Statement of Commissioner Joshua D. Wright - Federal Trade Commission v. Springtech 77376, LLC, et al. ("Cedarcide Industries")
North America Marketing and Associates, LLC, et al.
United States Benefits, LLC, et al.
Filiquarian Publishing, LLC; Choice Level, LLC; and Joshua Linsk, In the Matter of
Xenith, LLC
NHS Systems, Inc. also d/b/a National Healthcare Solutions and National Health Net Online, Physician Health Service, LLC also d/b/a American Health Benefits On Line, et al.
DesignerWare, LLC, In the Matter of
J.A.G. Rents, LLC, also d/b/a ColorTyme, In the Matter of
Dinamica Financiera, LLC, a California limited liability company, et al.
Oltrin Solutions, LLC, a company; JCI Jones Chemicals, Inc.
The FTC required bleach producer and seller Oltrin Solutions, LLC to release its competitor, JCI Jones Chemicals, Inc. from an agreement not to sell bleach in North Carolina and South Carolina. This non-compete agreement was part of a 2010 transaction between the two firms that the FTC alleges violated antitrust laws. The FTC’s settlement with Oltrin and JCI will restore competition between these two producers and sellers of bulk bleach, which is primarily used to disinfect water. The FTC contends that the deal between the two firms eliminated substantial competition between Oltrin and JCI in the relevant geographic market; substantially increased the market concentration for bulk bleach sales in the relevant geographic market; and increased Oltrin’s ability to raise bulk bleach prices. The FTC order requires Oltrin to release JCI from the non-compete agreement, transfer a minimum volume of its bulk bleach contracts back to JCI, and provide a short-term backup supply agreement that will facilitate JCI’s re-entry into the bulk bleach market in North Carolina and South Carolina.