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.
Human Resource Development Services, Inc. d/b/a Saint James School of Medicine, FTC v.
The Federal Trade Commission has taken action against a for-profit medical school in the Caribbean and its Illinois-based operators, alleging they deceptively marketed the school’s medical license exam test pass rate and residency matches to lure prospective students. The school and its operators are also charged with violating the Holder Rule, which preserves rights for injured consumers, and the Credit Practices Rule, which protects consumers in credit contracts. The $1.2 million judgment against Saint James School of Medicine and its operators will go toward refunds and debt cancellation for students harmed by the deceptive marketing.
Electrowarmth Products, LLC
The Federal Trade Commission sued Electrowarmth Products, LLC and its owner, Daniel W. Grindle, alleging that they falsely claimed the heated fabric mattress pads they sell for truck bunks were made in the USA. The FTC charged Grindle and Electrowarmth with violating the Textile Act and the Federal Trade Commission Act. According to the complaint, Grindle and Electrowarmth violated these acts by labeling and advertising the origin of the textiles used in their products as the United States, when these textile fiber products were wholly imported from China. The proposed order prohibits Grindle and Electrowarmth from making any country-of-origin claim about a product or service unless the claim is not misleading and they have a reasonable basis that substantiates their claim. It also requires Grindle and Electrowarmth to make certain disclosures about the country of origin of any product subject to the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act, and to provide compliance reports. The FTC announced approval of the final order in October 2022.
Westinghouse Outdoor Power Equipment (MWE Investments, LLC)
The FTC sued Harley-Davidson and Westinghouse outdoor generator maker MWE Investments, LLC for illegally restricting customers’ right to repair their purchased products. The complaints charge that the companies’ warranties included terms that conveyed the warranty is void if customers use independent dealers for parts or repairs. The FTC ordered the companies to fix warranties by removing illegal terms and recognizing the right to repair.
Harley-Davidson Motor Company
The FTC sued Harley-Davidson and Westinghouse outdoor generator maker MWE Investments, LLC for illegally restricting customers’ right to repair their purchased products. The complaints charge that the companies’ warranties included terms that conveyed the warranty is void if customers use independent dealers for parts or repairs. The FTC ordered the companies to fix warranties by removing illegal terms and recognizing the right to repair.
Statement of Chair Lina M. Khan Joined by Commissioner Alvaro M. Bedoya In the Matter of Drizly
Concurring and Dissenting Statement of Commissioner Christine S. Wilson in the Matter of Drizly, LLC
Statement of Chair Lina M. Khan Regarding the Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Unfair or Deceptive "Junk" Fees
Statement of Chair Lina M. Khan Regarding the Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Unfair or Deceptive Reviews and Endorsements
Statement of Chair Lina M. Khan Regarding the Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on the Funeral Industry Practices Rule
JAB Consumer Partners/VIPW/Ethos Veterinary Health, In the Matter of
The FTC imposed strict limits on JAB Consumer Partners’ future acquisitions of specialty and emergency veterinary clinics as a condition of JAB’s proposed $1.65 billion acquisition of VIPW, LLC, the parent of Ethos, an owner and operator of specialty and emergency veterinary clinics. The Commission alleged that the acquisition was likely to be anticompetitive in four geographic markets, ordering divestitures for various types of veterinary care in and around Richmond, Virginia, in and around the Washington DC Metro Area, particularly for customers to the southeast in Virginia and Maryland, in and around Denver, Colorado, and in and around downtown San Francisco, California. The Commission finalized the order in October 2022.