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.
Promedica Health System, Inc.
Novartis AG, In the Matter of (Alcon, Inc)
To settle FTC charges that its proposed acquisition of Alcon, Inc., would be anticompetitive, Novartis AG agreed to sell an injectable eye care drug used in cataract surgery. Novartis and Alcon are the only two U.S. providers of the class of drugs known as injectable miotics, and the FTC alleges that the acquisition would have created a monopoly in injectable miotics. The settlement requires Novartis to sell its drug Miochol-E to Bausch & Lomb, Inc.
D.R. Horton, Inc.
PepsiCo, Inc., In the Matter of
The Commission required that carbonated soft drink company PepsiCo, Inc. restrict its access to confidential business competitive information of rival Dr Pepper Snapple Group as a condition for proceeding with PepsiCo’s proposed $7.8 billion acquisition of its two largest bottlers and distributors, which also distribute Dr Pepper Snapple Group carbonated soft drinks.
Innovative Systems Technology, Inc., et al.
Firefighters Charitable Foundation, Inc.
Canada, Inc., d/b/a National Yellowpages Online, Inc., et al.
United Credit Adjusters, Inc., et al., FTC
Clean Credit Report Services, Inc., et al.
Monster Worldwide, Inc. / HotJobs.com, Ltd.
Charles River Laboratories International, Inc. / WuXi PharmaTech (Cayman) Inc.
Autodesk, Inc. / Softimage
J.K. Publications, Inc., et al.
Data Business Solutions Inc., also d/b/a Internet Listing Service Corp., et al.; FTC
Loss Mitigation Services, Inc., d/b/a Direct Lender and DirectLender.com, et al.
U-Haul International, Inc., and AMERCO, In the Matter of
U-Haul International, Inc. and its parent company settled FTC charges that they violated Section 5 of the FTC Act by inviting U-Haul’s closest competitor, Avis Budget Group, Inc., to collude on prices for truck rentals. U-Haul and Budget control more than 70 percent of the “do-it-yourself” one-way truck rental business in the United States. The FTC’s complaint alleges that on several occasions between 2006 and 2008, U-Haul tried to increase rates for one-way truck rentals by privately and publicly communicating with Budget, the second-largest truck rental company in the United States. The proposed settlement order against U-Haul and its parent company AMERCO bars them from inviting a competitor to divide markets, allocate customers, or fix prices, as well as participating in, maintaining, organizing, implementing, enforcing, offering, or soliciting any other company to engage in such conduct.