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.
MacAndrews & Forbes Holdings Inc.
Bosley, Inc., Aderans America Holdings, Inc., and Aderans Co., Ltd.
On 4/8/2013, Bosley, Inc., the nation’s largest manager of medical/surgical hair restoration procedures, settled Federal Trade Commission charges that it illegally exchanged competitively sensitive, nonpublic information about its business practices with one of its competitors, HC (USA), Inc., commonly known as Hair Club, in violation of Section 5 of the FTC Act. In settling the FTC’s charges, Bosley has agreed not to communicate such information in the future, and will institute an antitrust compliance program. The FTC alleged that for at least the past four years, Bosley exchanged competitively sensitive, nonpublic information about its business operations with Hair Club. The information exchanged by the companies’ CEOs included details about future product offerings, surgical hair transplantation price floors and discounts, plans for business expansion and contraction, and current business operations and performance.
Biglari Holdings, Inc.
On 9/25/2012, Biglari Holdings, Inc., a publicly traded holding company, agreed to pay $850,000 to resolve Federal Trade Commission allegations that it violated premerger reporting laws in connection with its 2011 acquisition of a stake in the restaurant operator Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc. At the request of the FTC, the U.S. Department of Justice has filed a complaint for civil penalties, alleging that Biglari improperly failed to report the transaction to U.S. antitrust authorities by claiming the purchases were a “passive” investment when, in reality, Biglari intended to become actively involved in the management of Cracker Barrel. The complaint alleges that, at the time of its acquisitions, Biglari Holdings intended to actively participate in the management of Cracker Barrel, including seeking a seat on the company’s board of directors. As a result, Biglari Holdings was ineligible for the passive investor exemption and was required to submit an HSR notification before acquiring shares of Cracker Barrel in excess of $66 million.
Western Digital, In the Matter of
The FTC required Western Digital Corporation to sell assets used to manufacture and sell desktop hard disk drives to Toshiba Corporation as part of a proposed settlement that resolves charges that Western Digital's proposed acquisition of rival Hitachi Global Storage Technologies Ltd. would likely have harmed competition in the market for desktop hard disk drives used in personal computers. The proposed FTC order settles charges that the deal as originally proposed would have left only two companies, Western Digital and Seagate Technology LLC, in control of the entire worldwide market for desktop hard disk drives.
Aderans Co. Ltd. / HC (USA)
Carter III, Harry J., individually and d/b/a Carter Funeral Chapels, Ltd.
Novartis AG, In the Matter of (Fougera Holdings, Inc)
The FTC required drug supplier Novartis AG to give up its marketing rights to four topical skin care medications, under a settlement resolving charges that Novartis' acquisition of pharmaceutical firm Fougera Holdings, Inc. would harm competition in the market for these topical drugs. The settlement order requires Novartis to end a marketing agreement that allows it to sell three topically-applied generic drugs and return all rights to a fourth generic drug in development to its manufacturer, Tolmar, Inc. According to the FTC's complaint, Novartis' acquisition of Fougera would violate Section 5 of the FTC Act and Section 7 of the Clayton Act by reducing competition in the generic drug markets for three skin care drugs: 1) generic calcipotriene topical solution, 2) generic lidocaine-prilocaine cream, and 3) generic metronidazole topical gel. The complaint also alleges that the acquisition would eliminate potential competition in the market for the sale of diclofenac sodium gel.
Statement of Commissioner Rosch, Concurring in Part and Dissenting in Part - In the Matter of McWane, Inc., a corporation, and Star Pipe Products, Ltd
Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., and Cephalon, Inc., In the Matter of
On 10/7/2011, the FTC required Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. to sell the rights and assets related to a generic cancer pain drug and a generic muscle relaxant, as a condition of its proposed $6.8 billion acquisition of rival drug firm Cephalon, Inc. In addition, the proposed settlement requires Teva to enter into a supply agreement that will allow a competing firm to sell a generic version of Cephalon’s wakefulness drug Provigil in 2012. On 7/3/2012, the FTC issued its final order. The final amended FTC order resolving the charges requires Teva to sell the rights and assets related to a generic cancer pain drug and a generic muscle relaxant to Par Pharmaceuticals, Inc. It also requires Teva to enter into a supply agreement that will allow Par to sell a generic version of Cephalon's wakefulness drug Provigil in 2012.
Donmaz Ltd., d/b/a Blair-Mazzarella Funeral Home, et al.
Healthcare Technology Holdings, Inc., In the Matter of
The FTC reached a settlement with Healthcare Technology Holdings, Inc., the parent company of market research firm IMS Health Inc., according to which IMS has agreed to sell two product lines of rival SDI Health LLC, as a condition of allowing it to proceed with its acquisition of SDI. The proposed settlement order requires the sale of SDI's promotional audit and medical audit businesses to an FTC-approved buyer to resolve the agency's charges that IMS's acquisition of SDI, as originally proposed, is anticompetitive and likely would increase prices for market research products in the health care industry. On1/10/2012, the FTC approved a modified final order settling the charges.
Sigma Corporation, In the Matter of
The FTC filed separate complaints against the three largest U.S. suppliers of ductile iron pipe fittings, which are used in municipal water systems around the United States. The FTC charged that the three companies, McWane, Inc., Star Pipe Products, Ltd., and Sigma Corporation, illegally conspired to set and maintain prices for pipe fittings, and that McWane illegally maintained its monopoly power in the market for U.S.-made pipe fittings by implementing an exclusive dealing policy. Sigma settled the FTC's charges prior to litigation (final order dated Feb. 27, 2012); Star settled soon after (final order dated May 8, 2012). The complaint against McWane was heard before an administrative law judge and later appealed to the Commission; see Docket No. 9351.
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.