Sorry, you need to enable JavaScript to visit this website.
Skip to main content

Displaying 1 - 20 of 58

Louisiana Real Estate Appraisers Board, In the Matter of

The Federal Trade Commission filed an administrative complaint against the Louisiana Real Estate Appraisers Board, alleging that the group is unreasonably restraining price competition for appraisal services in Louisiana, contrary to federal antitrust law. The complaint alleged that the appraisal board’s regulations exceeded the scope of the mandate outlined in the Dodd-Frank Act that required appraisal management companies to pay “a rate that is customary and reasonable for appraisal services performed in the market area of the property being appraised.” Specifically, the board required appraisal fees to equal or exceed the median fees identified in survey reports commissioned and published by the board. The board then investigated and sanctioned companies that paid fees below the specified levels. 

Shortly before the administrative trial was set to begin, the FTC and the board reached a proposed settlement agreement.

On April 5, 2022, the Commission announced the final consent agreement in this matter.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
161 0068
Docket Number
9374
Case Status
Pending

Oxbow Carbon Minerals, LLC, et al. v. Union Pacific Railroad Co.

Date
Citation Number
21-7093
Federal Court
U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Joint amicus brief of the United States and Federal Trade Commission in support of rail shipper plaintiffs. The brief urges affirmance of the district court decision that interpreted a provision of...

Board of Dental Examiners of Alabama, In the Matter of

To settle FTC charges that its actions violated the antitrust laws, the Board of Dental Examiners of Alabama agreed to stop requiring on-site supervision by licensed dentists of alignment scans of prospective patients’ mouths seeking to address misaligned teeth or gaps between teeth. According to the complaint, the board amended a rule to prohibit dental hygienists and other non-dentist practitioners from performing scans inside a patient’s mouth without on-site dentist supervision. The complaint alleges that the Board unreasonably excluded from competition providers of teledentistry-based teeth alignment products and services, and that it did this without adequate active supervision from neutral state officials, in violation of the FTC Act. On Dec. 21, 2021, the FTC announced the final consent agreement in this matter.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
1910153
Docket Number
C-4757
Case Status
Pending

Benco/Schein/Patterson, In the Matter of

The Federal Trade Commission issued an administrative complaint alleging that Benco, Henry Schein and Patterson, the nation's three largest dental supply companies, violated U.S. antitrust laws by conspiring to refuse to provide discounts to or otherwise serve buying groups representing dental practitioners. These buying groups sought lower prices for dental supplies and equipment on behalf of solo and small-group dental practices seeking to gain discounts by aggregating and leveraging the collective purchasing power and bargaining skills of the individual practices. The complaint also alleges an FTC Act Section 5 violation against Benco for inviting a fourth competing distributor to join the conspiracy.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
151 0190
Docket Number
9379
Case Status
Closed

Rent-A-Center, Inc., In the Matter of

Rent-to-own operators Aaron’s Inc., Buddy’s Newco, LLC, and Rent-A-Center, Inc. agreed to settle FTC charges that they negotiated and executed reciprocal purchase agreements in violation of federal antitrust law. The complaints allege that from June 2015 to May 2018, Aaron’s, Buddy’s, and Rent-A-Center each entered into anticompetitive reciprocal agreements with each other and other competitors. The three proposed consent agreements prohibited the rent-to-own companies and their franchisees from entering into any reciprocal purchase agreement or inviting others to do so, and from enforcing the non-compete clauses still in effect from the past reciprocal purchase agreements. After a public comment period, the Commission announced the final consent agreements.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
191 0074
Case Status
Pending

Aaron's Inc., In the Matter of

Rent-to-own operators Aaron’s Inc., Buddy’s Newco, LLC, and Rent-A-Center, Inc. agreed to settle FTC charges that they negotiated and executed reciprocal purchase agreements in violation of federal antitrust law. The complaints allege that from June 2015 to May 2018, Aaron’s, Buddy’s, and Rent-A-Center each entered into anticompetitive reciprocal agreements with each other and other competitors. The three proposed consent agreements prohibited the rent-to-own companies and their franchisees from entering into any reciprocal purchase agreement or inviting others to do so, and from enforcing the non-compete clauses still in effect from the past reciprocal purchase agreements. After a public comment period, the Commission announced the final consent agreements.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
191 0074
Case Status
Pending

Joint Comment of the FTC Staff and DOJ Antitrust Division Staff to the California State Assembly Concerning California Assembly Bill 1541

Date
Matter Number
V200008
Comment by FTC and DOJ staff in response to invitation from California Assembly Member Jim Wood concerning the likely competitive effects of A.B.1541, a proposal to further restrict contracting...