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.
Global Instruments Ltd. and Charles Patterson, In the Matter of
Anesthesia Service Medical Group, Inc.
Aurora Associated Primary Care Physicians, L.L.C., Richard A. Patt, M.D., Gary L. Gaede, M.D., and Marcia L. Brauchler
Biovail Corporation
The Commission charged Biovail Corporation with illegally acquiring an exclusive patent license for Tiazac, a pharmaceutical used to treat high blood pressure and chronic chest pain. The complaint further alleged that Biovail, in an effort to maintain its monopoly, wrongfully listed the acquired license in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s “Orange Book” for the purpose of blocking generic competition to its branded Tiazac. The consent order requires Biovail to divest part of its exclusive rights to DOV; prohibits the firm from taking any action that would trigger additional statutory stays on final FDA approval of a generic form of Tiazac; and also prohibits Biovail from wrongfully listing any patents in the Orange Book for a product for which the company already has an New Drug Application from the FDA.
Pathway Merchandising, Inc., et al.
National Vending Consultants, Inc., Patrick Abeyta, Jr., and Debra Abeyta, U.S.
VISX, Inc.orporated
On June 4, 1999 an administrative law judge dismissed charges against VISX, a key developer of laser eye surgery equipment and technology, known as photorefractive keratectomy (PRK). According to the 1998 administrative complaint., VISX and Summit Technology, the only two firms legally able to market equipment for PRK, placed their competing patents in a patent pool and shared the proceeds each and every time a Summit or VISX laser was used. The administrative law judge also dismissed charges that VISX acquired a key patent by inequitable conduct and fraud on the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, ruling that complaint counsel failed to present evidence that an act of fraud was committed since information was not willfully withheld from the patent office. A final order settled the price fixing allegations in the 1998 complaint. On February 7, 2001, the Commission dismissed its complaint after the U.S. patent and Trademark Office issued a Reexamination Certificate of U.S. Patent No. 5,108,388.
Mylan Laboratories, Inc., Cambrex Corporation, Profarmaco S.R.I., and Gyma Laboratories of America, Inc.
Complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia charged Mylan with restraint of trade, monopolization and conspiracy to monopolize the market for two generic drugs used to treat anxiety, lorazepam and clorazepate, through exclusive dealing arrangements. The Commission alleged that Mylan, Gyma Laboratories of America, Inc., Cambrex Corporation and Profarmaco S.R.L. conspired to deny Mylan’s competitors ingredients necessary to manufacture lorazepam and 40 clorazepate. The complaint sought consumer redress of at least $120 million and to enjoin the alleged illegal exclusive licensing agreements. The district court upheld the Commission’s authority to seek restitution in antitrust injunction actions under Section 13(b). The Commission approved a $100 million settlement. The opinion settled Commission concerns that Mylan, Gyma Laboratories of America, Inc., Cambrex Corporation and Profarmaco S.R.L. conspired to deny Mylan’s competitors ingredients necessary to manufacture lorazepam and 40 clorazepate. On February 1, 2002, the court granted approval to a plan of distribution to injured consumers who paid the increased prices and state agencies, including Medicaid programs, that purchased the drugs while the illegal agreements were in effect. The funds were distributed by the states.
Dominion Resources, Inc., and Consolidated Natural Gas Company
A final order permits Dominion's acquisition of Consolidated Natural Gas Company but requires the divestiture of Consolidated's Virginia Natural Gas, Inc. The complaint alleged that the merger would combine the dominant provider of electric power in Virginia with the primary distributor of natural gas in southeastern Virginia.
Conso International Corporation, MP Holdings, Inc. and The McCall Pattern Company
Conso International Corporation, owner of the Simplicity brand of home sewing patterns, abandoned its proposed acquisition of McCall Pattern Company after the Commission filed a motion for a preliminary injunction in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The complaint charged that the acquisition would reduce the number of United States sewing pattern designers and producers from three to two, creating a firm with more than 75% of the domestic unit sales of domestic home sewing patterns.
Patriot Computer Corporation
Ceridian Corporation, In the Matter of
A consent order requires Ceridian to grant licenses to new and existing firms that provide commercial credit cards (known as "trucking fleet-cards") used by over-the-road trucking companies to make purchases at retail locations. The order settles charges that Ceridian's consummated acquisitions of NTS Corporation and Trendar Corporation gave Ceridian the power to control the markets for the provision of trucking fleet cards and the systems used to read them at truck stops throughout the country.
McCormick & Company, Inc.
McCormick & Company agreed to settle charges that it violated the Robinson-Patman Act when the firm charged some retailers higher net prices for its spice and seasoning products than it charged other retailers. According to the complaint, McCormick, the world’s largest spice company, offered its products to some retailers at substantial discounts using a variety of different discounting schemes, such as slotting allowances, free goods, off-invoice discounts and cash rebates. The order prohibits McCormick from engaging in price discrimination and from selling its products to any purchaser at a net price higher than McCormick charged the purchaser’s competitor.
Provident Companies, Inc. and UNUM Corporation
The consent order ensures that the merged firm of Provident and UNUM Corporation will continue to participate in industry-wide solicitations for data to make actuarial predictions on probable future claims by applicants who hold policies with providers of individual disability insurance. The order requires Provident-to provide data to the Society of Actuaries and/or the National Association of Insurance Commissioners for studies and reports
Intel Corporation, In the Matter of (1999)
An administrative complaint charged that Intel Corporation used its monopoly power to deny three companies continuing access to technical information necessary to develop computer systems based on Intel microprocessors. A consent order (August 3, 1999) prohibits Intel, among other things, from withholding certain advance technical information from a customer as a means of intellectual property licenses. The order protects Intel's rights to withhold its information or microprocessors for legitimate business reasons.