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.
AmeriGas Propane, L.P.; AmeriGas Propane, Inc.
The FTC required AmeriGas L.P. and Energy Transfer Partners L.P. (ETP), two of the nation's largest propane distributors, to amend AmeriGas's proposed acquisition of ETP's Heritage Propane business as part of a settlement with the FTC. The settlement resolves FTC charges that the deal, as originally proposed, would have reduced competition and raised prices in the market for propane exchange cylinders that consumers use to fuel barbeque grills and patio heaters. The FTC's settlement requires AmeriGas to exclude ETP's cylinder exchange business, Heritage Propane Express, from the sale.
Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings, and Orchid Cellmark Inc.
The Commission required laboratory testing companies Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings and Orchid Cellmark Inc. to divest a portion of Orchid's paternity testing business, to resolve the FTC complaint alleging that LabCorp's $85.4 million acquisition of Orchid would have an anticompetitive impact in the market for paternity testing services used by government agencies. Under the proposed settlement order, the portion of Orchid's U.S. paternity testing business that is focused on sales to government agencies, and related assets, will be sold to another testing company, DNA Diagnostics Center (DDC). On 2/1/2012, the FTC approved a final order.
Americall Group, Inc., et al., United States of America (for the FTC)
Laboratory Corporation of America and Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings, In the Matter of
The FTC challenged Laboratory Corporation of America’s $57.5 million acquisition of rival clinical laboratory testing company Westcliff Medical Laboratories, Inc., alleging that the transaction would lead to higher prices and lower quality in the Southern California market for the sale of clinical laboratory testing services to physician groups. The complaint also alleges that LabCorp’s acquisition of Westcliff would leave only two significant laboratories in Southern California competing to provide critical testing services to most physician groups.The FTC also filed an action in federal court to prevent LabCorp from integrating the Westcliff assets while the case is being tried in the administrative court. The federal court denied the FTC motion for an injunction pending appeal. Staff filed an emergency motion for an injunction pending appeal with the 9th Circuit, which denied the Commission's appeal. The Commission dismissed its complaint and closed the investigation.
Laboratory Corporation of America and Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings
Amazon.com, Inc. / Quidsi, Inc.
Higgins, M. Catherine, In the Matter of
The Commission settled charges that the executive director of a Colorado physicians’ association actively tried to evade the terms of a 2008 FTC order by telling insurers that because she was not named individually in the order, she could simply negotiate on behalf of competing physicians on the “outside” and “not with my [association] hat, but as an individual.” The Commission complaint and consent order settling the FTC’s charges name the executive director individually, and will prevent her from orchestrating or implementing price-fixing agreements among the group’s competing physicians.
America Online, Inc., and CompuServe Interactive Services, Inc.,In the Matter of
American Veterans Relief Foundation, Inc., et al., FTC
American Telecom Services Inc.
National Association of Music Merchants, Inc., In the Matter of
The National Association of Music Merchants (NAMM), a trade association with more than 9,000 members nationwide, settled charges that it violated federal law by enabling and encouraging the exchange of competitively sensitive price information among its members. The FTC alleged that NAMM organized meetings at which its members were encouraged to communicate, and did in fact share, information about prices and business strategy. To the detriment of consumers, NAMM’s conduct enhanced the members’ ability to coordinate price increases for musical instruments. In settling the complaint, NAMM agreed to stop engaging in such conduct.