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.
Apex Processing Center
The Federal Trade Commission has stopped scammers who the agency says facilitated an operation to prey on students seeking debt relief. The agency charges that the defendants pretended to be affiliated with the U.S. Department of Education, used deceptive loan forgiveness promises, and falsely claimed they were offering relief under the “Biden Loan Forgiveness” plan to lure students and collect millions in illegal upfront fees.
After the FTC filed a complaint seeking to end the deceptive practices, a federal court temporarily halted the operations and froze the assets of Apex Processing Center and its owners.
In February 2024, under proposed orders settling the FTC’s charges, several defendants in the case—including Express Enrollment LLC, Intercontinental Solutions LLC, Ivan Esquivel, and Robert Kissinger were permanently banned from the debt relief industry and were ordered to turn over their assets to the FTC. In April 2024, the ringleader of the scheme, Marco Manzi, was also banned from the industry and was ordered to turn over assets as part of a settlement with the FTC.
AT&T Mobility LLC (Mobile Data Service)
AT&T reached a settlement with the FTC over allegations that the wireless provider misled millions of its smartphone customers by charging them for “unlimited” data plans while reducing their data speeds.
X-Mode Social, Inc.
X-Mode Social and its successor Outlogic will be prohibited from sharing or selling any sensitive location data to settle FTC allegations that the company sold precise location data that could be used to track people’s visits to sensitive locations such as medical and reproductive health clinics, places of religious worship and domestic abuse shelters.
Womply, FTC v.
Womply and its CEO, Toby Scammell, have agreed to pay $26 million to settle FTC charges they preyed on small businesses in desperate need of PPP funding. The FTC’s complaint alleges they widely advertised that small businesses – particularly one-person businesses like gig workers – could successfully get PPP funding when they applied through Womply. The complaint charges, however, that more than 60 percent of Womply applications never resulted in funding.
In addition, according to the complaint, Womply and Scammell advertised that their automated processes and good customer service would help small businesses secure PPP loans fast. In fact, applicants regularly faced significant issues that slowed down or fully hindered their applications and were often unable to receive customer service assistance they were promised, according to the complaint.
Zaappaaz LLC
The Federal Trade Commission filed suit against Zaappaaz, the operators of wrist-band.com and other online storefronts, for failing to deliver on promises that they could quickly ship products like face masks, sanitizer, and other personal protective equipment (PPE) related to the coronavirus pandemic.
The lawsuit alleges that the company violated the FTC’s Mail, Internet and Telephone Order Rule (Mail Order Rule), which requires that companies notify consumers of shipping delays in a timely manner and give consumers the chance to cancel orders and receive prompt refunds.
Response Tree, LLC
On January 2, 2024, the Department of Justice on referral from the FTC filed a complaint alleging that California-based lead generator Response Tree LLC and its president, Derek Thomas Doherty operated more than 50 websites designed to trick consumers into providing their personal information for supposed mortgage refinancing loans and other services. These telemarketing campaigns, which made robocalls and calls to numbers on the DNC Registry, were illegal, as the telemarketers did not have consumers’ consent to be called.
Under a proposed order settling the FTC’s charges, Response Tree and Derek Thomas Doherty will be banned from making or assisting anyone else in making robocalls or calls to phone numbers on the FTC’s Do Not Call (DNC) Registry.
Benefytt Technologies, et al., FTC v.
The Federal Trade Commission is taking action against healthcare company Benefytt Technologies, two subsidiaries, former CEO Gavin Southwell, and former vice president of sales Amy Brady, for lying to consumers about their sham health insurance plans and using deceptive lead generation websites to lure them in. According to the FTC complaint, Benefytt also illegally charged people exorbitant junk fees for unwanted add-on products without their permission. The proposed court orders require Benefytt to pay $100 million in refunds and prohibit the company from lying about their products or charging illegal junk fees. Southwell and Brady will be permanently banned from selling or marketing any healthcare-related product, and Brady will also be banned from telemarketing.
Joint Comment of the United States Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission Regarding Exemptions to Permit Circumvention of Access Controls on Copyrighted Works
Elegant Solutions, Inc. (Mission Hills Federal)
The Federal Trade Commission has stopped Mission Hills Federal, a student loan debt relief scheme, alleging it bilked more than $23 million from thousands of consumers with false claims that it would service and pay down their student loans. After the FTC filed a complaint seeking to end the deceptive practices, a federal court temporarily halted the scheme and froze its assets. The FTC filed an amended complaint on August 27, 2019, adding Labiba Velazquez as an alleged defendant. On July 20, 2020, the court granted final summary judgment.
In June 2021, the defendants appealed the District Court’s granting of summary judgment. In June 2022, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued its decision, rejecting the defendants’ arguments and affirmed the District Court’s grant of summary judgment, ruling in favor of the FTC. In March 2024, the FTC sent more than $4.1 million in refunds to consumers harmed by the defendants.
Rite Aid Corporation, FTC v.
Rite Aid is prohibited from using facial recognition technology for security or surveillance purposes for five years to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that the retailer failed to implement reasonable procedures and prevent harm to consumers in its use of facial recognition technology in hundreds of stores.
The proposed order requires Rite Aid to implement comprehensive safeguards to prevent these types of harm to consumers when deploying automated systems that use biometric information to track them or flag them as security risks. It also requires Rite Aid to discontinue using any such technology if it cannot control potential risks to consumers. To settle charges it violated a 2010 Commission data security order by failing to adequately oversee its service providers, Rite Aid is also required to implement a robust information security program, which must be overseen by the company’s top executives.
Global Tel Link Corporation
The FTC alleged that Global Tel*Link Corp. and two of its subsidiaries failed to secure sensitive data of hundreds of thousands of users stored in a cloud environment and failed to alert all those affected by the incident.
Statement of Chair Lina M. Khan Joined by Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter and Commissioner Alvaro M. Bedoya in the Matter of Avast Limited
RCG Advances, LLC
The FTC filed a complaint against RCG Advances, LLC—formerly known as Richmond Capital Group, LLC, and also doing business as Viceroy Capital Funding and Ram Capital Funding—and a related entity and individuals. The complaint alleges that, since at least 2015, the defendants have deceived small businesses and other organizations by misrepresenting the terms of merchant cash advances they provided, and then used unfair collection practices, including threatening physical violence, to compel consumers to pay. The FTC also alleges that defendants have made unauthorized withdrawals from consumers’ accounts.
RCG Advances, LLC and Robert Giardina are permanently banned from the merchant cash advance industry for deceiving and threatening small businesses and their owners. In addition, the court ordered RCG Advances and Giardina to make an upfront payment of $1.5 million and subsequent payment of more than $1.2 million to refund consumers.
Jonathan Braun, who controlled small-business funding company RCG Advances, will face a permanent ban from the merchant cash advance and debt collection industries. A federal court issued summary judgment in favor of the FTC in the case along with a permanent injunction against Braun.
As a result of a Federal Trade Commission lawsuit, a federal court has entered a judgment requiring merchant cash advance operator Jonathan Braun to pay $20.3 million in monetary relief and civil penalties.
Nexway, Inc., In the Matter of
The Federal Trade Commission has acted to stop Nexway, a multinational payment processing company, along with its CEO and chief strategy officer, from serving as a facilitator for the tech support scammers through credit card laundering. The defendants in the case have agreed to proposed court orders that prohibit them from any further payment laundering and require them to closely monitor other high-risk clients for illegal activity. The complaint and proposed orders were filed by the U.S. Department of Justice on behalf of the FTC.
The Federal Trade Commission is sending more than $610,000 in refunds to consumers who lost money to a tech support scam facilitated by the payment processing company Nexway.
EduTrek, LLC
The Federal Trade Commission has charged a telemarketing operation and its owners with making millions of illegal, unsolicited calls about educational programs to consumers who submitted their contact information to websites promising help with job searches, public benefits, and other unrelated programs.
In early September 2023, a federal judge in Illinois ruled in the FTC’s favor, finding that the defendants made millions of illegal, unsolicited calls to consumers on the Do Not Call Registry. In granting summary judgment, the court found that the FTC was entitled to both injunctive relief and civil penalties and has scheduled a hearing to determine the amount of the civil penalty award and the scope of injunctive relief.
A federal district court entered final orders against a telemarketing company and its owners, who made millions of illegal, unsolicited calls to people that were registered on the Do Not Call Registry. The court ordered the defendants to pay $28.7 million in civil penalties and permanently banned the defendants from participating in telemarketing or assisting and facilitating others engaged in telemarketing to consumers.
ExotoUSA LLC
The Federal Trade Commission is taking action against Florida-based ExotoUSA LLC. (d/b/a Old Southern Brass) for falsely claiming that certain company products were manufactured in the U.S, and that the company was veteran-operated and donated 10 percent of its sales to military service charities.
The FTC’s proposed order would stop the company and its owner, Austin Oliver, from making these deceptive claims and require them to pay a monetary judgment.
According to the FTC’s complaint, Old Southern Brass made many claims on its website and advertising that the products it sold were made in the United States.
Lanier Law, LLC
The Federal Trade Commission is sending more than $222,000 in refunds to consumers harmed by a deceptive mortgage relief operation known as Lanier Law. The scheme collected thousands of dollars in upfront fees from homeowners by promising to lower their monthly payments but then failed to deliver.
Syngenta and Corteva, FTC v.
The Federal Trade Commission and state partners have filed a complaint in federal court alleging that pesticide manufacturers Syngenta Crop Protection and Corteva, Inc. have used so-called “loyalty” programs to block and restrict generic competition from pesticide markets, leaving farmers to pay elevated prices for crop protection. The complaint seeks to bar Syngenta and Corteva from continuing these programs and from entering into any similar arrangements in the future, and to restore competition to affected markets.