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.
Steven J. Bransfield
A group of affiliate marketers who lured consumers into a business coaching and investment scheme known as My Online Business Education (MOBE) will surrender millions of dollars in assets to settle Federal Trade Commission charges.
Michael A. Giannulis
A group of affiliate marketers who lured consumers into a business coaching and investment scheme known as My Online Business Education (MOBE) will surrender millions of dollars in assets to settle Federal Trade Commission charges.
Peabody Energy-Arch Coal
The Federal Trade Commission has filed an administrative complaint challenging a proposed joint venture between Peabody Energy Corporation and Arch Coal. The transaction would combine their coal mining operations in the Southern Powder River Basin, located in northeastern Wyoming. The admininstrative complaint alleges that the transaction will eliminate competition between Peabody and Arch Coal, which are the two major competitors in the market for thermal coal in the Southern Powder River Basin, and the two largest coal-mining companies in the United States. This civil case seeks a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction enjoining the defendants from consummating their joint venture. The Commission votes to issue the administrative complaint and to authorize staff to seek a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction were both 4-1. The administrative trial is scheduled to begin on Aug. 11, 2020.
Par Petroleum/Mid Pac Petroleum, In the Matter of
Texas-based energy company Par Petroleum Corporation agreed to terminate its storage and throughput rights at a key gasoline terminal in Hawaii, to settle FTC charges that Par’s proposed $107 million acquisition of Koko’oha Investments, Inc.’s wholly-owned subsidiary Mid Pac Petroleum, LLC would likely be anticompetitive. According to the FTC’s complaint, the proposed merger would reduce competition and lead to higher prices for bulk supply of Hawaii-grade gasoline blendstock, ultimately increasing the price of gasoline for Hawaii consumers. As a result of the proposed acquisition, Par gained Mid Pac’s rights to Aloha’s Barbers Point terminal, which it does not need for importation because it produces its own blendstock, but which it could exercise in a manner that impairs Aloha’s use of its terminal. If Par were to hamper Aloha’s import capability, it would weaken Aloha’s ability to negotiate lower bulk supply prices from Par and Chevron, and thus reduce Aloha’s ability to compete effectively in the bulk supply market. Potential new competitors would be unable to deter or counteract the anticompetitive effects resulting from the acquisition, according to the complaint. The consent agreement requires Par to terminate the Barbers Point terminal storage and throughput rights it acquires from Mid Pac within five days after the merger is completed. Par will retain rights to load a limited number of tanker trucks at the Barbers Point terminal, and must obtain prior FTC approval to modify these rights or enter into any new agreement at the Barbers Point terminal. In January 2020, the FTC sought public comment on Par’s application to modify the agreement to store petroleum products at Barbers Point terminal.
A1 Janitorial Supply Corp.
The FTC is mailing refund checks totaling more than $2.6 million to small businesses who lost money to a New York-based office supply scam operated by a business known as A-1 Janitorial.
US Foods and SGA, In the Matter of
Food distributor US Foods, Inc. has agreed to divest assets to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that US Foods, Inc.’s proposed $1.8 billion acquisition of Services Group of America, Inc. would violate federal antitrust law. The complaint alleges that, in Eastern Idaho, Western North Dakota, Eastern North Dakota, and the Seattle area, the transaction would eliminate a key broadline distributor and limit customers’ ability to switch between distributors to obtain better pricing and service. Under the proposed consent agreement, within 30 days of the acquisition closing, US Foods must divest three FSA distribution centers: one in Boise, Idaho; another in Fargo, North Dakota (FSA competes in both Eastern and Western North Dakota out of this facility); and a third in the greater Seattle area. On Nov. 19, 2019, the FTC announced that it has approved a final order settling the charges.
Statement of Commissioner Noah Joshua Phillips In the Matter of Bristol-Myers Squibb Company and Celgene Corporation
Dissenting Statement of Commissioner Rohit Chopra In the Matter of Bristol-Myers Squibb Company and Celgene Corporation
Statement of Commissioner Christine S. Wilson In the Matter of Bristol-Myers Squibb Company and Celgene Corporation
Dissenting Statement of Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter In the Matter of Bristol-Myers Squibb Company and Celgene Corporation
J. William Enterprises, LLC
The FTC’s December 2016 complaint alleged that between 2011 and 2016 the defendants called timeshare property owners falsely claiming that they had a buyer or renter ready to buy or rent their properties for a specified price, or making false promises to sell the timeshares quickly. A May 2018 settlement order permanently banned the defendants from timeshare resale services and telemarketing and required them to surrender approximately $3.4 million worth of assets to the Commission. On October 10, 2019, the FTC mailed 8,088 refund checks totaling nearly $2.7 million to consumers defrauded by the scheme.
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.
Global Processing Solutions, Advanced Mediation Group, Lamar Snow, Jahaan McDuffie, and Glentis Wallace
In November 2017, the Federal Trade Commission charged a Georgia-based debt collection business with tricking people into paying money for debts they did not owe. A federal court temporarily halted the scheme and froze its assets at the FTC’s request. In September 2018, the operators settled the FTC’s claims and are now banned from the debt collection business and from buying or selling debt. The FTC mailed refund checks in September 2019 totaling more than $516,000 to 3,977 consumers as part of the settlement.
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.