Legal Library: Cases and Proceedings

The Federal Trade Commission is returning more than $930,000 to consumers who bought tea products that Teami marketed and sold using allegedly deceptive health claims.

The FTC sued Teami, LLC and its owners in March 2020, charging that the company made bogus health claims and paid for endorsements from well-known social media influencers who did not adequately disclose that they were being paid to promote the defendant’s products. Teami claimed without reliable scientific evidence that their Teami 30 Day Detox Pack would help consumers lose weight, and that its other teas would fight cancer, clear clogged arteries, decrease migraines, treat and prevent flus, and treat colds.

In March 2021, a New York-based company and its CEO agreed to settle FTC charges that they sold hundreds of thousands of indoor TV antennas and signal amplifiers to consumers using deceptive claims that the products would let users cancel their cable service and still receive all of their favorite channels for free. Among other things, the proposed consent order settling the FTC’s complaint prohibits the defendants from making claims about: 1) any product’s rating, ranking or superiority to other products; 2) the channels users will receive; or 3) any material aspect of a product’s performance, efficacy, or central characteristics, unless the claims are true and substantiated.

In December 2016, DeVry University and its parent company agreed to a $100 million settlement of a Federal Trade Commission lawsuit alleging that they misled prospective students with ads that touted high employment success rates and income levels upon graduation. Under the settlement, DeVry was ordered to pay $49.4 million in cash which was distributed to qualifying students who were harmed by the deceptive ads, as well as $50.6 million in debt relief.

The Federal Trade Commission filed a law enforcement action to block U.S. semiconductor chip supplier Nvidia Corp.’s $40 billion acquisition of UK-based semiconductor design firm Arm Ltd., the largest transaction in the history of the semiconductor industry. The FTC’s action seeks to preserve competition in markets for computer chips used in datacenters and in automotive advanced driver assistance systems. The complaint named Nvidia Corp., Arm Ltd., and Arm owner Softbank Group Corp. In February 2022, Nvidia Corp. announced that it had terminated its proposed acquisition of Arm Ltd. (Arm) from SoftBank Group Corp, and the Commission dismissed the complaint.

In April 2021, two companies, BASF SE and DIEM Labs, agreed to pay a total of more than $416,000 to settle FTC charges that they deceptively marketed two dietary fish oil supplements as clinically proven to reduce liver fat in adults and children with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). The payment will enable the Commission to provide refunds to all consumers who bought either supplement. They also were barred from the allegedly illegal conduct. The Commission announced approval of the final consent orders in June 2021.

The Federal Trade Commission issued an administrative complaint in August 2020 against a marketer, Traffic Jam Events, LLC, and its owner, David J. Jeansonne II (collectively, the "Respondents"), charging multiple counts of deceptive conduct. The administrative complaint mirrors a prior federal court complaint, which the Commission voluntarily dismissed to pursue a broader administrative proceeding.  On October 25, 2021, the Commission granted Complaint Counsel’s Motion for Summary Decision and ordered Respondents to cease and desist from such conduct for twenty years. 

The Federal Trade Commission required generic drug marketers ANI Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Novitium Pharma LLC to divest, to Prasco LLC, ANI’s development rights to one generic drug and assets with respect to another generic drug as part of a settlement resolving charges that ANI’s $210 million acquisition of Novitium likely would be anticompetitive. According to the complaint, without a remedy, the acquisition would likely harm future competition in U.S. markets for both of these generic products. The order requires ANI and Novitium to divest ANI’s rights and assets to generic SMX-TMP oral suspension and generic dexamethasone tablets to Prasco within 10 days after the acquisition is final. On Jan. 12, 2022, the Commission announced the final consent order in this matter.

Following a public comment period, the Federal Trade Commission has approved a final order settling charges that three PET resin producers’ proposed $1.1 billion joint acquisition out of bankruptcy of an under-construction PET production facility would violate federal antitrust law.

The Federal Trade Commission issued a proposed order imposing strict limits on future mergers by DaVita, Inc., a dialysis service provider with a history of fueling consolidation in life-saving health industries. The complaint alleged that DaVita’s proposed acquisition of the University of Utah Health’s dialysis clinics would reduce competition in vital outpatient dialysis services in the Provo, Utah market. Under the proposed order, DaVita is required to divest three Provo-area dialysis clinics to Sanderling Renal Services, Inc. and is prohibited from entering into or enforcing non-compete agreements and other employee restrictions.

The Federal Trade Commission obtained an order permanently banning a payment processor that facilitated a fraudulent student loan debt relief scheme from processing debt relief payments. The order also requires the company and its owner to surrender $500,000 to the FTC for consumer redress.

The FTC’s complaint against Automatic Funds Transfer Services, Inc. (AFTS) and its owner, Eric Johnson, alleges that AFTS processed at least $31 million in consumer payments for a fraudulent student loan debt relief scheme sued by the FTC in 2019. The debt relief scheme used numerous names, including The Student Loan Group (SLG).

The Federal Trade Commission has issued a complaint charging Broadcom with illegally monopolizing markets for semiconductor components used to deliver television and broadband internet services through exclusive dealing and related conduct. The complaint alleges that Broadcom illegally maintained its power in the three monopolized markets by entering long-term agreements with both OEMs and service providers that prevented these customers from purchasing chips from Broadcom’s competitors. The complaint also alleges that Broadcom leveraged its power in the three monopolized chip markets to extract from customers exclusivity and loyalty commitments for the supply of chips in the five related markets. Under the consent order, Broadcom must stop requiring its customers to source components from Broadcom on an exclusive or near exclusive basis.

In April 2020, the marketers of three supplements called Neurocet, Regenify, and Resetigen-D settled FTC charges that they deceptively promoted their products to older Americans using false claims that their products could stop pain and treat age-related ailments. The proposed order bars the defendants—five related companies and their principals from making any claims about the health benefits of their products unless they are true and supported by scientific evidence. In October 2021, the FTC announced it was returning $1.1 million to consumer who bought the defendants’ products.

The defendants behind a New York-based debt collection scheme will be permanently banned from the debt collection industry under a settlement with the Federal Trade Commission and the New York Attorney General, who alleged that the defendants bilked consumers out of millions of dollars by brokering and collecting on fake debts that people did not owe. In October, 2021 the FTC returned $772,512 to consumers who were targeted by the defendants.

Announced in June 2019 as part of a crackdown on illegal robocalls against operations around the country responsible for more than one billion calls, thisFTC complaint against five corporate and four individual defendants<, alleges that since at least 2017 the defendants have used a combination of illegal telemarketing robocalls, live telephone calls, text messaging, internet ads, emails, social media, and live events to market and sell consumers fraudulent money-making opportunities. The complaint charges the defendants, who operate from California, Colorado, New York, and Tennessee, with violating the FTC Act, the Telemarketing Sales Rule (TSR), or both, by making deceptive earnings claims through robocalls and other marketing techniques. In September 2021, The Federal Trade Commission sent checks totaling more than $1 million to consumers who were harmed by the company.

Two Nevada companies and two individuals have agreed to stop charging consumers thousands of dollars to apply for multiple credit cards in their names in order to pay for expensive and often ineffective training programs under a proposed settlement of a Federal Trade Commission lawsuit.

The FTC filed a federal court complaint along with a proposed settlement which requires the defendants to stop obtaining credit cards for consumers for a fee. In addition, the defendants will be required to pay $2.1 million under the proposed settlement, which will be distributed by the FTC to consumers.

In September 2021, The Federal Trade Commission sent checks totaling more than $2 million to consumers who were harmed by the company.

An Atlanta-based debt collection company and its owners will be permanently banned from the debt collection industry under the terms of a settlement with the Federal Trade Commission. 

In its complaint against Critical Resolution Mediation, LLC, along with Brian Charles McKenzie and Tracy Dottrice Warren, the FTC alleged that the defendants and their agents threatened consumers with arrest and imprisonment and tried to collect debts that consumers did not actually owe.

The FTC’s complaint alleged that Critical Resolution’s collectors regularly posed as law enforcement officers, attorneys, mediators, or process servers, lending credence to their threats about supposed unpaid debts. In many cases, the defendants were attempting to collect on so-called “phantom” debt—debts that either were never owed—or debts that were no longer owed.