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.
Illumina, Inc., and GRAIL, Inc., In the Matter of
The Federal Trade Commission filed an administrative complaint and authorized a federal court lawsuit to block Illumina’s $7.1 billion proposed acquisition of Grail—a maker of a non-invasive, early detection liquid biopsy test that can screen for multiple types of cancer in asymptomatic patients at very early stages using DNA sequencing. Illumina is the only provider of DNA sequencing that is a viable option for these multi-cancer early detection, or MCED, tests in the United States.
The complaint alleges the proposed acquisition will diminish innovation in the U.S. market for MCED tests, which could be used to detect up to 50 types of cancer. Most of these types of cancer are not screened for at all today, and the MCED test could save millions of lives around the world. The trial began on Aug. 24, 2021. On May 20, 2021, the FTC authorized staff to dismiss its federal court complaint for Preliminary Injunction and Temporary Restraining Order.
In April 2023, the Commission issued an opinion and order reversing the Administrative Law Judge’s dismissal of the proceeding and requiring Illumina to divest Grail. In June 2023, Illumina petitioned the Fifth Circuit to review the Commission’s order and opinion, and the Fifth Circuit heard arguments in the case in September 2023.
On December 15, 2023, the Fifth Circuit issued an opinion in the case finding that there was substantial evidence supporting the Commission’s ruling that the deal was anticompetitive. The Fifth Circuit vacated the Commission’s order and remanded it for further proceedings based on the standard the Commission applied when reviewing one aspect of Illumina’s rebuttal evidence. On December 17, 2023, Illumina then announced it would divest Grail.
Adobe, Inc., U.S. v.
The Federal Trade Commission is taking action against software maker Adobe and two of its executives, Maninder Sawhney and David Wadhwani, for deceiving consumers by hiding the early termination fee for its most popular subscription plan and making it difficult for consumers to cancel their subscriptions.
A federal court complaint filed by the Department of Justice upon notification and referral from the FTC charges that Adobe pushed consumers toward the “annual paid monthly” subscription without adequately disclosing that cancelling the plan in the first year could cost hundreds of dollars. Wadhwani is the president of Adobe’s digital media business, and Sawhney is an Adobe vice president.
Concurring Statement of Commissioner Melissa Holyoak In the Matter of Kochava Inc.
Novant Health, Inc. and Community Health Systems, Inc., In the Matter of
Statement of Chair Lina M. Khan in the Matter of Arise Virtual Solutions Inc.
Concurring Statement of Commissioner Melissa Holyoak In the Matter of Arise Virtual Solutions, Inc.
Mail Tree Inc
As a result of a June 2024 settlement with the FTC, the operators of a sweepstakes scam that cost consumers millions agreed to settlements that permanently ban them from operating sweepstakes or making claims to consumers about prizes they have won or may win. The FTC first filed its complaint against Matthew Pisoni, Marcus Pradel and John Leon in 2015, alleging that they helped operate a sprawling sweepstakes operation that took more than $28 million from consumers throughout the United States and other countries In August 2024, the Commission announced the settlement with another individual defendant in the case, Victor Ramirez.
Monument, Inc., U.S. v.
The FTC has taken action against an alcohol addiction treatment service for allegedly disclosing users’ personal health data to third-party advertising platforms, including Meta and Google, for advertising without consumer consent, after promising to keep such information confidential.
Lurn
The Federal Trade Commission is taking action to stop Lurn, a Maryland-based online business coaching seller, from making unfounded claims that consumers can make significant income by starting an array of online businesses. The company, its CEO Anik Singal, and spokespeople Tyrone Cohen and David Kettner have agreed to court orders that will require them to stop their unlawful practices, and require Lurn and Singal to turn over $2.5 million to the FTC to be used to refund money to consumers they harmed.
The Federal Trade Commission is sending more than $2.4 million in refunds to consumers who paid for Lurn’s business consulting programs and were deceived about the amount of money they could make from these services.
Cerebral, Inc. and Kyle Robertson, U.S. v.
Cerebral, Inc. has agreed to an order that, will restrict how the company can use or disclose sensitive consumer data and require it to provide consumers with a simple way to cancel services to settle FTC charges that the telehealth firm failed to secure and protect sensitive health data.
Nerium International, LLC
The Federal Trade Commission sued the multi-level marketer Neora, LLC, formerly known as Nerium International, LLC, and its Chief Executive Officer, Jeffrey Olson, alleging that the company operates as an illegal pyramid scheme and falsely promises recruits they will achieve financial independence if they join the scheme. The lawsuit also alleged that defendants deceptively promote “EHT” supplements as an antidote to concussions and chronic traumatic encephalopathy caused by repetitive brain trauma, as well as Alzheimer’s disease and Parkinson’s disease. The FTC sought to permanently stop the defendants’ deceptive practices alleged in the complaint. In September 2023, the district court ruled against the FTC on its claims. In May 2024, the district court ruled that Neora could not recover its fees and expenses because the FTC’s position in this case was “substantially justified.”