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.
North Texas Specialty Physicians
There is a related administrative proceeding.
On March 7, 2007, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in the appeal by respondents of the Commission's opinion in NTSP. The Court agreed with the Commission that the anticompetitive effects of NTSP’s practices were obvious. Per remand by the Court, the Commission modified one provision of its remedial order, issuing a Final Order in September 2008. On February 28, 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court denied NTSP's petition for review.
Nine West Group Inc.
Nine West Group Inc. settled charges that it entered into agreements with retailers; coerced other retailers into fixing the retail prices for their shoes; and restricted periods when retailers could promote sales at reduced prices. The order, which lasts 20 years, prohibits Nine West from fixing the price at which dealers may advertise, promote or sell any product. Nine West is one of the country’s largest suppliers of women’s shoes. In 2008, Nine West petitioned to have the order modified in light of the 2007 Supreme Court decision, Leegin v. PSKS, Inc., which eliminated the per se rule for minimum resale pricing agreements. The Commission modified the order in part to allow Nine West to enter into resale price maintenance agreements that do not unreasonably restrict competition, and requiring Nine West to provide periodic reports of any RPM agreements with retailers.
Connecticut Chiropractic Association, The; Connecticut Chiropractic Council, The; and Robert L. Hirtle, Esq., In the Matter of
The FTC challenged a group boycott between two Connecticut chiropractic associations in which the health care providers refused to deal with a cost-saving Connecticut health plan. The Commission issued a consent order ending the agreement and preventing the involved parties from entering into such agreements in the future.
Exquisite Caterers, LLC, et al., v. Popular Leasing USA, Inc., et al., and Doe Corps 1-40, Defendant
ERG Ventures, LLC and d/b/a ERG Ventures, LLC2, Media Motor, Joysticksavers.com, and PrivateinPublic.com; Elliot S. Cameron, individually and d/b/a ERG Ventures, LLC2, Media Motor, Joysticksavers.com, and PrivateinPublic.com; Robert A. Davidson, II,
Equitable Resources, Inc., Dominion Resources, Inc., Consolidated Natural Gas Company, and The Peoples Natural Gas Company
The Commission charged that Schering-Plough’s proposed $14.4 billion acquisition of Organon Biosciences N.V. threatened to substantially reduce competition in the U.S. market for three popular vaccines used to treat poultry, a staple in American food markets. The November 2007 order settling the charges required the sale of assets required to develop, manufacture, and market these vaccines to Wyeth. In addition, Schering-Plough was required to sign a supply and transition services agreement with Wyeth, under which Schering will provide the vaccines for a period of two years, allowing time for the necessary FDA approvals.
Schering-Plough Corporation, In the Matter of
The Commission charged that Schering-Plough’s proposed $14.4 billion acquisition of Organon Biosciences N.V. threatened to substantially reduce competition in the U.S. market for three popular vaccines used to treat poultry, a staple in American food markets. The November 2007 order settling the charges required the sale of assets required to develop, manufacture, and market these vaccines to Wyeth. In addition, Schering-Plough was required to sign a supply and transition services agreement with Wyeth, under which Schering will provide the vaccines for a period of two years, allowing time for the necessary FDA approvals.
Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company, The, Inc., and Pathmark Stores, Inc., In the Matter of
The Commission intervened in the proposed $1.3 billion acquisition of Pathmark Stores by Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea (A&P), alleging the transaction would have reduced competition among grocery stores in the highly concentrated markets of Staten Island and Shirley, Long Island, New York. A&P operates stores under the A&P, A&P Super Foodmart, Food Basics, Food Emporium, Super Fresh, and Waldbaum’s banners. The Commission’s consent order required A&P to divest five supermarkets in Staten Island, and one supermarket in Shirley.
ValueAct Partners, LP, United States of America (for the FTC)
In December 2007, the Commission challenged ValueAct Capital Partners’ violations of the Hart-Scott-Rodino Pre-Merger Notification Act’s filing requirements related to the acquisition of stock in three companies, Gartner, Inc., Catalina marketing Group, and Acxiom Corp. The firm previously violated the HSR filing requirements in 2003, and after making corrective filings, and agreeing to put HSR safeguards into place to ensure compliance with the filing requirements, the Commission decided to take no action. However, ValueAct failed to enact the necessary preventative measures and again violated the HSR filing requirements with its aforementioned acquisitions resulting in the Commission seeking civil penalties in the amount of $1.1 million.