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.
Green Foot Global, LLC, d/b/a Green Foot Global, Greenfoot Global, GFG, GFG Commercial, GFG Industrial, www.GreenFootGlobal.com, GFG Fuel Tech, LLC, and GWO Network
Wellness Support Network, Inc., et al.
Southeast Trust, LLC, formerly known as The Debt School, LLC and d/b/a Financial Freedom Credit Counseling, et al.
Direct Financial Management Inc., et al.
Práxedes E. Alvarez Santiago, M.D., et al. (“PR Nephrologists”), In the Matter of
Eight independent nephrologists in Puerto Rico settled Federal Trade Commission charges that they illegally collectively bargained with insurers and refused to treat health plan patients when their price demands were rebuffed. Under a proposed order settling the FTC’s charges, the doctors are barred from jointly negotiating prices, jointly refusing to deal with any insurer, and jointly refusing to treat patients. According to the FTC’s complaint, the eight doctors have violated federal antitrust laws since late 2011 by 1) collectively negotiating and fixing the prices upon which they would contract with Humana to extract higher reimbursement rates, and 2) collectively terminating their contracts with Humana and refusing to treat Humana patients enrolled in the Mi Salud program when Humana would not meet their price demands.
Dynamic Financial Resolutions Inc., et al.
Latrese & Kevin Enterprises Inc., also d/b/a Hargrave & Associates Financial Solutions, et al.
PLS Financial Services, Inc., et al.
Asia Pacific Telecom, Inc. d/b/a Asia Pacific Networks, et al.
Phillips Petroleum Co. and Conoco Inc.
A final consent order allows the merger of Phillips Petroleum and Conoco Inc. but requires certain divestitures and other relief to maintain competition in the gasoline refining market in specific areas of the United States. Among the assets to be divested are refineries, propane terminals, and natural gas gathering facilities. The FTC approved an application to reopen and modify its final order to change the license agreement that ConocoPhillips has with Holly Corporation, an independent oil refining company. The changes approved by the Commission allow ConocoPhillips and Holly to make the licensing of the "Phillips" and "Phillips 66" brands non-exclusive in two states for the last two years of the FTC-required agreement between them.