Legal Library: Cases and Proceedings

Reckitt Benckiser Group plc has agreed to pay $50 million to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that it violated the antitrust laws through a deceptive scheme to thwart lower-priced generic competition to its branded drug Suboxone. According to the complaint, before the generic versions of Suboxone tablets became available, Reckitt and its former subsidiary Reckitt Benckiser Pharmaceuticals, now known as Indivior, Inc., developed a dissolvable oral film version of Suboxone and worked to shift prescriptions to this patent-protected film. Worried that doctors and patients would not want to switch to Suboxone Film, Reckitt allegedly employed a “product hopping” scheme where the company misrepresented that the film version of Suboxone was safer than Suboxone tablets because children are less likely to be accidentally exposed to the film product. Indivior has agreed to pay an additional $10 million to settle FTC charges. On May 10, 2021, the FTC announced that it sent nearly $60 million in payments to consumers who were victims of the scheme.

The Federal Trade Commission filed an administrative complaint and authorized a suit in federal court to block internet listing services provider CoStar Group Inc.’s proposed $587.5 million acquisition of competitor RentPath Holdings, Inc. The complaint alleged that the acquisition would significantly increase concentration in the already highly concentrated markets for internet listing services advertising for large apartment complexes in 49 individual metropolitan areas across the United States. On Dec. 31, 2020, the FTC issued a statement on the parties’ announcement that they had abandoned the acquisition.

The Federal Trade Commission required medical device companies Stryker Corp. and Wright Medical Group N.V. to divest all assets related to Stryker’s total ankle replacements and finger joint implant products to remedy concerns, as alleged in the complaint, that Stryker’s proposed $4 billion acquisition of Wright would harm competition in these two markets. Under the consent order, Stryker and Wright must divest all assets associated with Stryker’s total ankle replacements and finger joint implants to DJO Global, allowing it to become an independent, viable, and effective competitor in these markets.  After a period for public comment, the Commission issued its final order on December 11, 2020.

The FTC issued an administrative complaint challenging the merger of two prosthetics manufacturers that are top sellers of prosthetic knees equipped with microprocessors. According to the FTC’s complaint, Otto Bock’s consummated acquisition of FIH Group Holdings (owner of Freedom Innovations) harmed competition in the U.S. market for microprocessor prosthetic knees by eliminating head-to-head competition between the two companies, removing a significant and disruptive competitor, and entrenching Otto Bock’s position as the dominant supplier. Microprocessor knees, which use microprocessors to adjust the stiffness and positioning of the joint in response to variations in walking rhythm and ground conditions, provide a stable platform for amputees. Compared to other products, microprocessor prosthetic knees reduce the risk of falling, cause less pain, and promote the health and function of the sound limb. In addition to issuing an administrative complaint, the Commission authorized agency staff to seek a temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction, and ancillary relief in federal court, should doing so be necessary to ensure the Freedom Innovations business remains viable and to preserve the Commission ability to order effective relief. On Dec. 1, 2020, the Commission announced approval for the divestiture of the Freedom assets.

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.

The Federal Trade Commission issued an administrative complaint alleging that Benco, Henry Schein and Patterson, the nation's three largest dental supply companies, violated U.S. antitrust laws by conspiring to refuse to provide discounts to or otherwise serve buying groups representing dental practitioners. These buying groups sought lower prices for dental supplies and equipment on behalf of solo and small-group dental practices seeking to gain discounts by aggregating and leveraging the collective purchasing power and bargaining skills of the individual practices. The complaint also alleges an FTC Act Section 5 violation against Benco for inviting a fourth competing distributor to join the conspiracy.

The Federal Trade Commission sued F & G International Group Holdings, LLC, FG International, LLC, and their principal J. Glenn Davis, alleging they make false or unsubstantiated R-value claims about their architectural coatings products. In July 2020, the FTC sued four companies that sell paint products used to coat buildings and homes, alleging that they deceived consumers about their products’ insulation and energy-savings capabilities. In complaints filed in federal court, the FTC charged that the companies falsely overstated the R-value ratings of the coatings, making deceptive statements about heat flow and insulating power.

Reckitt Benckiser Group plc has agreed to pay $50 million to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that it violated the antitrust laws through a deceptive scheme to thwart lower-priced generic competition to its branded drug Suboxone. According to the complaint, before the generic versions of Suboxone tablets became available, Reckitt and its former subsidiary Reckitt Benckiser Pharmaceuticals, now known as Indivior, Inc., developed a dissolvable oral film version of Suboxone and worked to shift prescriptions to this patent-protected film. Worried that doctors and patients would not want to switch to Suboxone Film, Reckitt allegedly employed a “product hopping” scheme where the company misrepresented that the film version of Suboxone was safer than Suboxone tablets because children are less likely to be accidentally exposed to the film product. Invidior has agreed to pay an additional $10 million to settle FTC charges.

In September 2017, a group of online marketers agreed to pay more than $2.5 million to settle FTC charges that it deceived consumers with “free” and “risk-free” trials for cooking and golfing products. According to a complaint filed in March 2017, the defendants offered “free” products, without clearly disclosing that by accepting the “free” product consumers were agreeing to be charged each month for a subscription if they did not cancel. They also allegedly misrepresented their return, refund and cancellation policies. The order setting the FTC’s complaint barred the defendants from misrepresenting the cost of any good or service, that consumers will not be charged, that consumers can get something for a processing or shipping fee with no further obligation, and that a product or service is free. In April 2020, the FTC announced it was sending refund checks totaling $488,629 to defrauded consumers.

A group of affiliate marketers who lured consumers into a business coaching and investment scheme known as My Online Business Education (MOBE) will surrender millions of dollars in assets to settle Federal Trade Commission charges.

A group of affiliate marketers who lured consumers into a business coaching and investment scheme known as My Online Business Education (MOBE) will surrender millions of dollars in assets to settle Federal Trade Commission charges.

In June 2018, the final two defendants among a group of California-based marketers were permanently barred from the deceptive marketing and billing tactics used in connection with selling skincare products offered to consumers with supposedly “risk-free” trials. The court order settled the charges against them, which the FTC announced in mid-2015. In all, 32 defendants who sold AuraVie, Dellure, LéOR Skincare, and Miracle Face Kit branded skincare products agreed to court orders with the FTC or had default orders entered against them. In November 2019, the FTC announced it was returning over $1.8 million to consumers who bought the deceptively marketed products.

Food distributor US Foods, Inc. has agreed to divest assets to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that US Foods, Inc.’s proposed $1.8 billion acquisition of Services Group of America, Inc. would violate federal antitrust law. The complaint alleges that, in Eastern Idaho, Western North Dakota, Eastern North Dakota, and the Seattle area, the transaction would eliminate a key broadline distributor and limit customers’ ability to switch between distributors to obtain better pricing and service. Under the proposed consent agreement, within 30 days of the acquisition closing, US Foods must divest three FSA distribution centers: one in Boise, Idaho; another in Fargo, North Dakota (FSA competes in both Eastern and Western North Dakota out of this facility); and a third in the greater Seattle area. On Nov. 19, 2019, the FTC announced that it has approved a final order settling the charges.

In November 2017, the Federal Trade Commission charged a Georgia-based debt collection business with tricking people into paying money for debts they did not owe. A federal court temporarily halted the scheme and froze its assets at the FTC’s request. In September 2018, the operators settled the FTC’s claims and are now banned from the debt collection business and from buying or selling debt. The FTC mailed refund checks in September 2019 totaling more than $516,000 to 3,977 consumers as part of the settlement.