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.
Roche Holding Ltd, In the Matter of
Roche agreed to divest, certain assets in the U.S. and Canada to settle antitrust concerns stemming from its proposed acquisition of Corange Limited. The consent order permits the acquisition but requires the divestiture of Cardiac thrombolytic agents (drugs used to treat heart attack victims) and ongoing business assets relating to chemicals used to test for the presence of illegal or abused drugs.
Lafarge S.A., Blue Circle Industries PLC, et al., In the Matter of
The consent order required the divestiture of Blue Circle Industries PLC's cement business serving the Great Lakes region of Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin and New York; its cement business in the Syracuse, New York; and its lime business in the southeast United States. These divestitures settled antitrust concerns stemming from Lafarge's proposed merger with Blue Circle. The two firms are market leaders in the industry for cement and lime.
Exxon Corporation and Mobil Corporation
A consent order settled antitrust concerns stemming from Exxon's acquisition of Mobil Corporation, but requires the largest retail divestiture in Commission history. The divestitures, representing only a fraction of the worldwide assets of Exxon and Mobil, include 2,431 gas stations; an Exxon refinery in California; a pipeline; and other assets. According to the complaint, the proposed merger would injure competition in moderate concentrated markets -California gasoline refining, marketing and retail sales of gasoline in the Northeast, Mid-Atlantic and Texas; and in the highly concentrated markets for jet turbine oil.
Albertson's, Inc. and American Stores Company
The final order, modified after the public comment period, does not require the divestiture of a Lucky (American Stores Company) store in Lompoc, California to Ralph's. Albertson's Inc. agreed to divest 104 supermarkets and American Stores Company agreed to divest 40 supermarkets to settle charges that Albertson's acquisition of American Stores raises antitrust concerns in 57 markets in California, Nevada and New Mexico. The divestiture agreement is the largest retail divestiture of supermarkets ever required by the Commission to date.
Revco D.S., Inc.
Hearst Trust, The, The Hearst Corporation, and First DataBank, Inc.
The Commission negotiated an agreement with The Hearst Corporation (Hearst) to settle a permanent injunction action filed by the FTC alleging that Hearst failed to provide documents required by premerger notification law and then consummated a merger that monopolized the integrated drug information database market. Under the terms of the order, Hearst divested the Medi-Span business to Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc. , a subsidiary of Wolters Kluwer, n.v., disgorged $19 million in profits, and to complied with certain other obligations.
Pet Express, Inc., et al., U.S.
Metso Oyj, and Svedala Industri AB, In the Matter of
Metso settled charges that if its acquisition of Svedala Industries AB were allowed to proceed as planned, competition would be lessened in four rock processing equipment markets: primary gyratory crushers; jaw crushers; cone crushers; and grinding mills. The firms agreed to divest Metso's worldwide primary gyratory crusher and grinding mill businesses and Svedala's worldwide jaw crusher and cone crusher businesses. The three crusher businesses would be purchased by Sandvik AB, a Swedish corporation; the grinding mill business would be purchased by Outokumpu of Finland. Metso and Svedala are the two largest suppliers of rock processing equipment in the world.
Hearst Trust, The, and The Hearst Corporation., U.S. (for the FTC)
Hearst and its subsidiary paid a $4 million civil penalty to settle charges that they failed to include required documents in the notification and report form file in 1998 for the proposed acquisition of Medi-Span International, Inc. The complaint alleged that the omitted documents hindered the antitrust agencies in their review and analysis of the proposed acquisition. The complaint, stipulation and final judgment were filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by Commission attorneys acting as special attorneys to the United States Attorney General. During fiscal year 2001, the Commission filed a related complaint for a permanent injunction alleging that Hearst and First DataBank created a monopoly through the acquisition of Medi-Span, First DataBank's only other competitor selling software and data detailing information for pharmaceutical prices, descriptions, dosages, and interactions. The Final Order and Stipulation requiring divestiture and disgorgement of profits was entered December 18, 2001.
Computers by Us, Inc. et al., U.S.
Etablissements Delhaize Freres et Cie "Le Lion" S.A., Delhaize America, Inc., and Hannaford Bros. Co
The consent order permitted the merger of Establissements Delhaize Freres et Cie “Le Lion” S.A. and Delhaize America, Inc. with Hannaford Bros. Co. and required the sale of 37 Hannaford supermarkets and one Hannaford site to three different buyers.
Alaska Healthcare Network, Inc.
An association of 86 physicians practicing in the Fairbanks, Alaska area settled charges that the Alaskan Healthcare Network illegally formulated a fee schedule based on its members’ current prices for use in negotiations with third-party payers in an effort to obtain higher prices for medical services.
H.J. Heinz Company and Milnot Holding Corp
The FTC sought a preliminary injunction to block H.J. Heinz Company's (Heinz) proposed $185 million acquisition of Milnot Holding Company, owner of Beech-Nut Nutrition Corporation (Beech-Nut), citing concerns that the transaction would reduce the number of competitors in the baby food market from three to two, creating a duopoly. Heinz and Beech-Nut are the nation's second- and third-largest producers of prepared baby food. The district court denied the motion, but the U.S. District Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia reversed the federal district court decision and granted the Commission’s request for entry of a preliminary injunction. Soon after, the parties abandoned the transaction.
Churchill, Lee S., d/b/a Credit Approval Service, et al.
National Vending Consultants, Inc., Patrick Abeyta, Jr., and Debra Abeyta, U.S.
EnviroBrands, Inc.
Boeing Company, The
The consent order permits the acquisition of Hughes Space and Communications, a subsidiary of General Motors Corporation, but prohibits Boeing from providing systems engineering and technical assistance (SETA) to the U.S. Department of Defense for a specific classified program. According to the complaint, Boeing is the sole supplier of SETA programs and Hughes is one of two competing contractors.
Philip Morris Companies, Inc., and Nabisco Holdings Corp
The consent order permits the merger of Philip Monis and Nabisco Holdings Corporation while settling charges that the merger of the two food companies would reduce competition in the already highly-concentrated food product markets. Under terms of the order, the parties are required to divest Nabisco's dry- mix gelatin, dry-mix pudding, no-bake dessert, and baking powder assets to The Jet Sea Company and Nabisco's intense mints assets to Hershey Foods Corporation.
VISX, Inc.orporated
On June 4, 1999 an administrative law judge dismissed charges against VISX, a key developer of laser eye surgery equipment and technology, known as photorefractive keratectomy (PRK). According to the 1998 administrative complaint., VISX and Summit Technology, the only two firms legally able to market equipment for PRK, placed their competing patents in a patent pool and shared the proceeds each and every time a Summit or VISX laser was used. The administrative law judge also dismissed charges that VISX acquired a key patent by inequitable conduct and fraud on the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, ruling that complaint counsel failed to present evidence that an act of fraud was committed since information was not willfully withheld from the patent office. A final order settled the price fixing allegations in the 1998 complaint. On February 7, 2001, the Commission dismissed its complaint after the U.S. patent and Trademark Office issued a Reexamination Certificate of U.S. Patent No. 5,108,388.