Skip to main content

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. 

Refine your results

Filters
Search
Include spaces in matter number if applicable. Ex.: 182 3125
Date
Displaying 161 - 180 of 270
Cases and Proceedings

Puerto Rico Association of Endodontists, Corp., In the Matter of

The Commission approved a final consent order settling charges alleging that thirty competing association members acted unlawfully by agreeing to set the prices they would charge dental insurance plans, and by refusing to deal with plans that would not accept the collectively determined prices.
Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
0510170
Cases and Proceedings

Nestle Holdings, Inc., and Ralston Purina Company

Nestle settled antitrust charges that its $10.3 billion proposed acquisition of Ralston Purina Company would substantially lessen competition in the United States market for dry cat food through the elimination of direct competition between the two firms and increase the likelihood that the combined firm could unilaterally exercise market power. The order requires the divestiture of Ralston's Meow Mix and Alley Cat brands to J.W. Childs Equity Partners II,L.P.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
0110083
Docket Number
C-4028
Cases and Proceedings
Adjudicative Proceedings

Kentucky Household Goods Carriers Association, Inc., In the Matter of

After an administrative trial, the administrative law judge found that a group of affiliated intrastate movers had engaged in horizontal price-fixing by filing collective rates on behalf of its member motor common carriers for the intrastate transportation of property within the Commonwealth of Kentucky. The judge also ruled that the association’s conduct was not protected by the state action doctrine because the State of Kentucky did not supervise the rate-making practices of the group. On July 12, 2004, the Kentucky Household Goods Carriers Association, Inc. filed an appeal of the initial decision with the Commission. On June 22, 2005, the Commission issued a unanimous opinion finding that the Kentucky Household Goods Carriers Association, Inc. engaged in illegal price-fixing by jointly filing tariffs containing collective rates on behalf of its members, and that the state action doctrine does not immunize that activity from antitrust liability. On August 22, 2006, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the opinion of the Commission.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
0210115g
Docket Number
9309
Cases and Proceedings

Magellan Midstream Partners, L.P., et al., In the Matter of

Under terms of a consent order, Magellan completed its acquisition of pipelines and terminals in the Midwestern United States and a refined petroleum products terminal in Oklahoma City that supplies light petroleum products such as gasoline and diesel fuel from the Shell Oil Company. The consent order required Magellan to divest the Shell Oklahoma City terminal to a Commission-approved buyer within six months after the transaction is consummated.
Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
0410164
Cases and Proceedings

Valero, L.P., Valero Energy Corporation, et al., In the Matter of

The consent order permitted Valero L.P. to acquire Kaneb Services LLC and Kaneb Pipe Line Partners subject to the divestitures of assets that will preserve existing competition for petroleum transportation and terminaling in Northern California, Pennsylvania, and Colorado, and avoid a potential increase in bulk gasoline and diesel prices. The order also requires Valero to develop an information firewall and maintain open, non-discriminatory access to two retained Northern California terminals, in order to ensure access to ethanol terminaling in Northern California.
Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
0510022
Docket Number
C-4141
Cases and Proceedings

Enterprise Products Partners L.P., and Dan L. Duncan, In the Matter of

Enterprise Products Partners L.P. settled charges that its $13 billion merger with GulfTerra Energy/Partners L.P. would eliminate competition in two markets: the pipeline transportation of natural gas from the West Central Deepwater region of the Gulf of Mexico; and propane storage and terminaling services in Hattiesburg, Mississippi. The consent order requires the divestiture of an interest in a pipeline transportation system and an interest in a propane facility that serves the Dixie Pipeline.
Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
0410039
Docket Number
C-4123
Cases and Proceedings

Buckeye Partners, L.P., and Shell Oil Company, In the Matter of

The consent order settled charges that Buckeye's proposed acquisition of five refined petroleum products pipelines and 24 petroleum products terminals in the United States from Shell Oil Company would reduce competition in the market for the terminaling of gasoline, diesel fuel, and other light petroleum products in the area of Niles, Michigan. Buckeye agreed to notify the Commission before acquiring any interest in the Niles petroleum terminal for a period of ten years.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
0410162
Displaying 161 - 180 of 270
Return to top