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.
Remarks of Chair Lina M. Khan Regarding Non-HSR Reported Acquisitions by Select Technology Platforms
Remarks of Chair Lina M. Khan on Passage of New Procedures to Open Up Rulemaking Petitions to the Public
Remarks of Chair Lina M. Khan Regarding the Proposed Rescission of the FTC’s Approval of the 2020 Vertical Merger Guidelines
Statement of Chair Lina M. Khan, Commissioner Rohit Chopra, and Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter on the Withdrawal of the Vertical Merger Guidelines
Statement of Chair Lina M. Khan Joined by Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter on Actions to Expedite Staff Investigations
Remarks of Chair Lina M. Khan Regarding the Proposed Policy Statement on Right to Repair
Remarks of Chair Lina M. Khan Regarding the Care Labeling Rule
Post-Commission Meeting Remarks of Chair Lina M. Khan
Remarks of Chair Lina M. Khan Regarding the Proposed Rescission of the 1995 Policy Statement Concerning Prior Approval and Prior Notice Provisions
Statement of Commissioner Rohit Chopra Joined by Chair Lina M. Khan and Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter Regarding the Adoption of the Final Made in USA Rule
Remarks of Chair Lina M. Khan on the Investigatory Resolutions
Statement of Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter Joined by Chair Lina M. Khan and Commissioner Rohit Chopra Regarding the Adoption of Revised Section 18 Rulemaking Procedures
Statement of Chair Lina M. Khan Joined by Commissioner Rohit Chopra and Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter on the Withdrawal of the Statement of Enforcement Principles Regarding “Unfair Methods of Competition” Under Section 5 of the FTC Act
Reckitt Benckiser Group PLC
Reckitt Benckiser Group plc has agreed to pay $50 million to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that it violated the antitrust laws through a deceptive scheme to thwart lower-priced generic competition to its branded drug Suboxone. According to the complaint, before the generic versions of Suboxone tablets became available, Reckitt and its former subsidiary Reckitt Benckiser Pharmaceuticals, now known as Indivior, Inc., developed a dissolvable oral film version of Suboxone and worked to shift prescriptions to this patent-protected film. Worried that doctors and patients would not want to switch to Suboxone Film, Reckitt allegedly employed a “product hopping” scheme where the company misrepresented that the film version of Suboxone was safer than Suboxone tablets because children are less likely to be accidentally exposed to the film product. Indivior has agreed to pay an additional $10 million to settle FTC charges. On May 10, 2021, the FTC announced that it sent nearly $60 million in payments to consumers who were victims of the scheme.
E.M. Systems & Services, LLC
The Federal Trade Commission is sending full refunds totaling more than $11 million to consumers who lost money to a bogus credit card interest rate reduction scheme operated by E.M. Systems & Services.
The FTC and the State of Florida alleged that the company’s owners, Steven D. Short and Karissa L. Dyar, used a variety of phony business names with associated websites, cold-called consumers with credit card debt and falsely promised to save them thousands of dollars by reducing their credit card interest rates. The FTC says that the defendants charged an up-front fee between $695 and $1,495, and falsely promised to provide refunds to consumers if they failed to reduce the interest rates.
In April 2021, the FTC used funds from this case to provide $11 million in redress to consumers harmed by the E.M. Systems and Services scam.
NutraClick, LLC, et al.
In September 2016, nutritional supplement marketer NutraClick agreed to settle FTC charges that it lured consumers with “free” samples of supplements and beauty products and then violated the law by charging them a recurring monthly fee without their consent. Four years later, in September 2020, the FTC filed a complaint alleging the company and its two principals were continuing to deceptively market their products, in violation of the FTC order. The settlement order, announced simultaneously with the complaint, bans the defendants from negative option marketing and requires them to pay more than $1 million for consumer redress.
Indivior Inc.
Reckitt Benckiser Group plc has agreed to pay $50 million to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that it violated the antitrust laws through a deceptive scheme to thwart lower-priced generic competition to its branded drug Suboxone. According to the complaint, before the generic versions of Suboxone tablets became available, Reckitt and its former subsidiary Reckitt Benckiser Pharmaceuticals, now known as Indivior, Inc., developed a dissolvable oral film version of Suboxone and worked to shift prescriptions to this patent-protected film. Worried that doctors and patients would not want to switch to Suboxone Film, Reckitt allegedly employed a “product hopping” scheme where the company misrepresented that the film version of Suboxone was safer than Suboxone tablets because children are less likely to be accidentally exposed to the film product. Invidior has agreed to pay an additional $10 million to settle FTC charges.