An official website of the United States government
Here’s how you know
The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.
The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.
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.
In March 2021, a New York-based company and its CEO agreed to settle FTC charges that they sold hundreds of thousands of indoor TV antennas and signal amplifiers to consumers using deceptive claims that the products would let users cancel their cable service and still receive all of their favorite channels for free. Among other things, the proposed consent order settling the FTC’s complaint prohibits the defendants from making claims about: 1) any product’s rating, ranking or superiority to other products; 2) the channels users will receive; or 3) any material aspect of a product’s performance, efficacy, or central characteristics, unless the claims are true and substantiated.
In December 2016, DeVry University and its parent company agreed to a $100 million settlement of a Federal Trade Commission lawsuit alleging that they misled prospective students with ads that touted high employment success rates and income levels upon graduation. Under the settlement, DeVry was ordered to pay $49.4 million in cash which was distributed to qualifying students who were harmed by the deceptive ads, as well as $50.6 million in debt relief.
The Federal Trade Commission sued to block Lockheed Martin Corporation’s $4.4 billion proposed vertical acquisition of Aerojet Rocketdyne Holdings Inc, the last independent U.S. supplier of missile propulsion systems. Aerojet supplies advanced power, propulsion, and armament systems, which are critical components for the missiles made by Lockheed and other defense prime contractors. The agency’s complaint alleged that if the deal is allowed to proceed, Lockheed will use its control of Aerojet to harm rival defense contractors and further consolidate multiple markets critical to national security and defense. On Feb. 15, 2022, the Commission issued a statement regarding the parties’ decision to abandon the transaction.
The Federal Trade Commission filed a law enforcement action to block U.S. semiconductor chip supplier Nvidia Corp.’s $40 billion acquisition of UK-based semiconductor design firm Arm Ltd., the largest transaction in the history of the semiconductor industry. The FTC’s action seeks to preserve competition in markets for computer chips used in datacenters and in automotive advanced driver assistance systems. The complaint named Nvidia Corp., Arm Ltd., and Arm owner Softbank Group Corp. In February 2022, Nvidia Corp. announced that it had terminated its proposed acquisition of Arm Ltd. (Arm) from SoftBank Group Corp, and the Commission dismissed the complaint.
In February 2022, at the request of the Federal Trade Commission, federal courts in California ordered two Voice-over-Internet Protocol (VoIP) service providers, Xcast and Deltracon, to turn over information that the agency is seeking as part of ongoing investigations into potentially illegal robocalls. Companies that fail to comply with such federal court orders can be held in contempt.
In February 2022, at the request of the Federal Trade Commission, federal courts in California ordered two Voice-over-Internet Protocol (VoIP) service providers, Xcast and Deltracon, to turn over information that the agency is seeking as part of ongoing investigations into potentially illegal robocalls. Companies that fail to comply with such federal court orders can be held in contempt.
In April 2021, two companies, BASF SE and DIEM Labs, agreed to pay a total of more than $416,000 to settle FTC charges that they deceptively marketed two dietary fish oil supplements as clinically proven to reduce liver fat in adults and children with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). The payment will enable the Commission to provide refunds to all consumers who bought either supplement. They also were barred from the allegedly illegal conduct. The Commission announced approval of the final consent orders in June 2021.
In 2020, Danaher Corporation agreed to divest assets to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that its proposed $21.4 billion acquisition of General Electric’s biopharmaceutical business, GE Biopharma, would violate federal antitrust law. Sartorius Stedim Biotech S.A. is the approved divestiture buyer. Sartorius agreed to obtain the Commission’s prior approval if it proposed to acquire Novasep Process SAS’s chromatography equipment business. On Feb. 1, 2022, the Commission announced that it granted Sartorius’s petition to proceed with this acquisition.
The Federal Trade Commission issued an administrative complaintin August 2020 against a marketer, Traffic Jam Events, LLC, and its owner, David J. Jeansonne II (collectively, the "Respondents"), charging multiple counts of deceptive conduct. The administrative complaint mirrors a prior federal court complaint, which the Commission voluntarily dismissed to pursue a broader administrative proceeding. On October 25, 2021, the Commission granted Complaint Counsel’s Motion for Summary Decision and ordered Respondents to cease and desist from such conduct for twenty years.
The Federal Trade Commission is returning more than $3.7 million to consumers who lost money because of unfair and deceptive loan servicing practices by online lender Avant, LLC.
The FTC sued Avant in April 2019, alleging that the company falsely advertised that it would accept payments by credit or debit cards, when in fact it did not. This often resulted in customers being charged additional interest on their loans as they tried to arrange a different form of payment. The FTC also alleged that the company withdrew money from customers’ bank accounts or charged their credit cards without authorization, failed to properly and timely credit payments made by check, provided deceptive payoff quotes to customers, and tried to collect more money than the quoted payoff amount.