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.
Dissenting Statement of Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter In the Matter of Bristol-Myers Squibb Company and Celgene Corporation
LifeLock, Inc., a corporation
LifeLock paid $100 million to settle Federal Trade Commission contempt charges that it violated the terms of a 2010 federal court order that requires the company to secure consumers' personal information and prohibits the company from deceptive advertising.
Quaker Chemical Corporation and Global Houghton Ltd., In the Matter of
Chemical companies Quaker Chemical Corp and Houghton International Inc. have agreed to divest assets to a subsidiary of French multinational corporation Total S.A., to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that Quaker’s proposed $1.4 billion acquisition of Houghton would violate federal antitrust law. According to the complaint, the proposed acquisition would harm competition in the North American market for aluminum hot rolling oil and associated technical support services; and in the North American market for steel cold rolling oils, and associated technical support services. Steel cold rolling oils include sheet cold rolling oil, pickle oil, and tin plate rolling oil. Under the proposed settlement agreement, Quaker must divest Houghton’s North American aluminum hot rolling oil and steel cold rolling oil product lines and related assets to Total. On Sept. 12, 2019, the FTC announced that it has approved a final order in this matter.
Nobetes Corp.
In December 2018, officers of a company that marketed and sold Nobetes, a pill they claimed treats diabetes, settled an FTC complaint alleging that the advertising claims for the product are false or unsubstantiated. The order settling the FTC’s complaint prohibits the company and its officers from undertaking future deceptive practices, including making unsubstantiated health claims, misleading consumers about the terms of “free trial” offers, billing consumers without their consent, and other practices related to the use of “expert” endorsements and consumer testimonials. In addition, it requires them to pay money to provide refunds to consumers who bought the product. In August 2019, the FTC returned $60,791 to these consumers.
Commerce Planet, Inc., a corporation, et al.
The FTC is mailing 53,595 refund checks totaling $748,070 to consumers nationwide who signed up for an online auction kit that was supposed to be free, but wasn’t. The kit actually cost consumers up to $59.95 per month if they failed to cancel a trial membership in a business opportunity program called Online Supplier.
Canon Inc. and Toshiba Corporation
Canon Inc. and Toshiba Corporation have agreed to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that the companies violated the premerger notification and waiting period requirements of the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act, or HSR Act, when Canon acquired Toshiba Medical Systems Corporation from Toshiba in 2016.
Statement of Commissioner Rohit Chopra on the Ruling by Judge Lucy Koh in Federal Trade Commission v. Qualcomm Incorporated
InterBill, Ltd. and Thomas Well
Thomas Wells and his payment processing company, Priority Payout Corp. (formerly known as InterBill, Ltd), have agreed to settle FTC charges that they repeatedly violated a 2009 court order issued against them. The settlement permanently bans Wells and Priority Payout Corp, from engaging in, and assisting others with, payment processing, and includes a $1.8 million contempt judgment against them.
Social Finance, Inc. and Sofi Lending Corp., In the Matter of
In October 2018, the FTC announced that online student loan refinancer SoFi Lending Corp. (SoFi) agreed to stop misrepresenting how much money student loan borrowers have saved, or will save, by refinancing their loans with the company. The Commission approved the final consent in February 2019. In its administrative complaint, announced concurrently with the proposed settlement, the FTC alleged that since April 2016 SoFi made prominent false statements about loan refinancing savings in television, print, and Internet advertisements.
Inside Publications, LLC, In the Matter of
Following a public comment period, the FTC has approved two final orders settling allegations that Creaxion Corporation, Inside Publications, LLC, and their respective principals misrepresented that paid endorsements were independent consumer opinions and that commercial advertising was independent journalistic content.
Creaxion Corp., In the Matter of
Following a public comment period, the FTC has approved two final orders settling allegations that Creaxion Corporation, Inside Publications, LLC, and their respective principals misrepresented that paid endorsements were independent consumer opinions and that commercial advertising was independent journalistic content.
Marathon Petroleum, et al., In the Matter of
Following a public comment period, the Federal Trade Commission has approved a final order settling charges that Marathon Petroleum Corp.’s proposed acquisition of Express Mart would violate federal antitrust law.
ReadyTech Corporation, In the Matter of
Grifols, S.A., and Grifols Shared Services North America, Inc., In the Matter of
The FTC required global healthcare company Grifols S.A. to divest blood plasma collection centers in three U.S. cities, among other conditions, as part of a settlement resolving charges that Grifols’ acquisition of Florida-based Biotest US Corporation is anticompetitive and violates federal antitrust law. The complaint alleges that, as proposed, the acquisition would harm competition in the markets for collection of human blood plasma in Lincoln, Nebraska, Augusta, Georgia, and Youngstown, Ohio. Grifols and Biotest US are the only companies that operate plasma collection centers in these cities, and, without a remedy, the merger would result in a merger-to-monopoly in these cities. Under the terms of the proposed settlement, Grifols will divest its plasma collection centers in these three cities to KedPlasma, which is a subsidiary of Kedrion Biopharma Inc., a leading manufacturer of protein products and the fifth-largest producer of plasma proteins worldwide.
The complaint also alleges that, absent a remedy, the acquisition would harm the U.S. market for hepatitis B immune globulin, or HBIG, a plasma-derived injectable medicine that provides hepatitis B antibodies for preventing hepatitis B infections. When Grifols announced the proposed acquisition in December 2017, Biotest US owned 41 percent of ADMA Biologics, Inc., which has the largest share in the U.S. market for HBIG and competes with Grifols and one other supplier. Biotest US has recently transferred its ownership share in ADMA to The Biotest Divestiture Trust, the parent company of Biotest US. Because Grifols is only seeking to acquire Biotest US and not its parent, Grifols will not acquire any ownership interest in ADMA under the proposed acquisition. Under the proposed consent agreement, Grifols is prohibited, without prior notification, from acquiring any ownership interest in ADMA or obtaining any rights to nominate or obtain representation on the ADMA Board of Directors.