Legal Library: Cases and Proceedings

As a result of a Federal Trade Commission lawsuit, a federal court has temporarily halted the operations of a wide-ranging business opportunity and credit repair scam that has operated under the name “Growth Cave” since at least 2020.

The FTC’s complaint against the operation and its owners and officers, Lucas Lee-Tyson, Osmany Batte (also known as “Ozzie Blessed”), and Jordan Marksberry, alleges that the Growth Cave operation has taken approximately $50 million from consumers using false promises of huge income.

In May 2025, the FTC filed an amended complaint in this case, adding two defendants based on information the FTC learned after the original filing.

The amended complaint names LLT Research as a new defendant in the case and adds as a relief defendant Friendly Solar, Inc.

In June 2024, the Federal Trade Commission announced that it took action to stop Prosperity Benefit Services, a student loan debt relief scheme that the agency says bilked more than $20.3 million from consumers seeking debt relief by pretending to be affiliated with the Department of Education. The FTC also charged that the company and its operators falsely claimed that they would take over consumers’ student loans to get them loan forgiveness that did not exist. In May 2025, the FTC announced that the operation and its owners are permanently banned from the debt relief industry and required to turn over all assets to resolve allegations that they misled consumers.

The Federal Trade Commission announced that crude oil producers XCL Resources Holdings, LLC (XCL), Verdun Oil Company II LLC (Verdun), and EP Energy LLC (EP) will pay a record $5.6 million civil penalty to settle allegations they engaged in illegal pre-merger coordination, known as gun jumping, in violation of the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act (HSR Act).

The Federal Trade Commission sued Uber Technologies, Inc. and Uber USA LLC (collectively, “Uber”) for alleged violations of Section 5 of the FTC Act and the Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence
Act (“ROSCA”). Among other things, the complaint alleges that Uber charges consumers for its subscription service, Uber One, through a negative option feature but has failed to provide a simple mechanism to stop recurring charges. The complaint also alleges Uber has charged consumers without their consent in violation of the FTC Act and ROSCA. Further, the complaint alleges Uber falsely claims that consumers can cancel Uber One at “any time” with no additional fees.
 

The FTC filed a lawsuit today against Uber, alleging the rideshare and delivery company charged consumers for its Uber One subscription service without their consent, failed to deliver promised savings, and made it difficult for users to cancel the service despite its “cancel anytime” promises.

The FTC has charged a business opportunity scheme with falsely claiming to help consumers build an “AI-powered Ecommerce Empire” by participating in its training programs that can cost almost $2,000 or by buying a “done for you” online storefront for tens of thousands of dollars. The scheme, known as Ecommerce Empire Builders (EEB), claims consumers can potentially make millions of dollars, but the FTC’s complaint alleges that those profits fail to materialize.

As a result of the FTC’s complaint, a federal court issued an order temporarily halting the scheme and putting it under the control of a receiver. The FTC’s case against the scheme is ongoing and will be decided by a federal court. 

In May 2025, EEB and its owner, Peter Prusinowski (also known as Peter Pru), agreed to a court order that bans them from selling business opportunities and require them to turn over assets to the FTC to be used for refunds to consumers.

Online cash advance company Cleo AI has agreed to pay $17 million to settle the Federal Trade Commission’s allegations that the company deceived consumers about how much money they could get and how fast that money could be available. The complaint, filed in federal district court along with the proposed settlement order, also alleges that Cleo made it difficult for consumers to cancel Cleo’s subscription service.

The FTC alleged that Facebook violated its privacy promises to consumers and subsequently violated a 2012 Commission order.

As a result of a Federal Trade Commission lawsuit, Publishers Clearing House (PCH) has agreed to a proposed court order will require it to pay $18.5 million to consumers who spent money and wasted their time, and make substantial changes to how it conducts business online.

In a complaint against PCH, the FTC charges that the company uses “dark patterns” to mislead consumers about how to enter the company’s well-known sweepstakes drawings and made them believe that a purchase is necessary to win or would increase their chances of winning, and that their sweepstakes entries are incomplete even when they are not. The FTC also charges that the company has added surprise shipping and handling fees to the costs of products, misrepresented that ordering is “risk free,” used deceptive emails as part of its marketing campaign, and misrepresented its policies on selling users’ personal data to third parties prior to January 2019. Many consumers affected by these practices are older and lower-income.

In April 2025, the FTC sent more than $18 million in refunds to consumers harmed by misleading claims made by Publishers Clearing House (PCH).

In January 2025, the FTC announced a complaint and proposed order require software provider accessiBe to pay $1 million to settle allegations that it misrepresented the ability of its AI-powered web accessibility tool to make any website compliant with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) for people with disabilities. The Commission approved the order as final in April 2025.

The Federal Trade Commission has sued Facebook, alleging that the company is illegally maintaining its personal social networking monopoly through a years-long course of anticompetitive conduct. The complaint alleges that Facebook has engaged in a systematic strategy—including its 2012 acquisition of up-and-coming rival Instagram, its 2014 acquisition of the mobile messaging app WhatsApp, and the imposition of anticompetitive conditions on software developers—to eliminate threats to its monopoly. The Commission vote to authorize staff to file for a permanent injunction and other equitable relief in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia was 3-2. Commissioners Noah Joshua Phillips and Christine S. Wilson voted no.

To view the FTC v. Meta trial exhibits, click here. Please note there is a two-business day delay in uploading exhibits. 

The Federal Trade Commission moved to block Tempur Sealy International, Inc.’s (Tempur Sealy) proposed $4 billion acquisition of Mattress Firm Group Inc. (Mattress Firm).

The Commission issued an administrative complaint and authorized a lawsuit in federal court to block the acquisition, alleging that Tempur Sealy—the world’s largest mattress supplier and manufacturer—will have the ability and incentive to suppress competition and raise prices for mattresses for millions of consumers once it acquires Mattress Firm.

Enbridge Inc. and Spectra Energy Corp agreed to settle FTC charges that their proposed merger likely would harm competition in the market for pipeline transportation of natural gas in three production areas off the coast of Louisiana. According to the FTC’s complaint, the merger likely would reduce natural gas pipeline competition in three offshore natural gas producing areas in the Gulf of Mexico—Green Canyon, Walker Ridge and Keathley Canyon—leading to higher prices for natural gas pipeline transportation from those areas. In portions of the affected areas, the FTC alleged, the merging parties’ pipelines are the two pipelines located closest to certain wells and, as a result, are likely the lowest cost pipeline transportation options for those wells. According to the FTC, the merger would give Canada-based Enbridge an ownership interest in both pipelines, which will give it access to competitively sensitive information of the Discovery Pipeline, as well as significant voting rights over the Discovery Pipeline. Access to its competitor’s competitively sensitive information and significant voting rights would provide Enbridge with the incentive and opportunity to unilaterally increase pipeline transportation costs for natural gas producers located in the affected areas. The exchange of information also may increase the likelihood of tacit or explicit anticompetitive coordination between the Walker Ridge Pipeline and the Discovery Pipeline. Under the settlement with the FTC, the companies have agreed to conditions that will preserve competition in those areas.The consent agreement requires Enbridge to establish firewalls to limit its access to non-public information about the Discovery Pipeline. Board members of the Spectra-affiliated companies that hold a 40 percent share in the Discovery Pipeline must recuse themselves from any vote involving the pipeline, with two limited exceptions. Also under the order, Enbridge must notify the Commission before acquiring an ownership interest in any natural gas pipeline operating in the Green Canyon, Walker Ridge and Keathley Canyon areas, or increasing the 40 percent ownership interest of Spectra affiliate DCP Midstream Partners, LP in the Discovery Pipeline.

In April 2025, the FTC approved a petition by Enbridge Inc. to reopen and set aside the Commission’s 2017 final consent order related to Enbridge’s merger with Spectra Energy Corp.