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.
Grand Canyon University/Grand Canyon Education
The FTC alleges that Grand Canyon Education (GCE), Inc., Grand Canyon University (GCU) and Brian Mueller—the CEO of GCE and president of GCU—deceived prospective doctoral students about the cost and course requirements of its doctoral programs and about being a nonprofit, while also engaging in deceptive and abusive telemarketing practices. The FTC announced on August 15, 2025 it had voted to dismiss the case.
Edwards Lifesciences Corp. and JenaValve Technology, Inc., In the Matter of
The Federal Trade Commission issued an administrative complaint to block medical device supplier Edwards Lifesciences Corp.’s (Edwards) proposed acquisition of JenaValve Technology, Inc. (JenaValve) due to concerns that the acquisition would limit patient access to lifesaving medical devices used to treat a potentially fatal heart condition.
Assurance IQ, LLC
In August 2025, the FTC announce Assurance IQ, LLC and MediaAlpha, Inc. will pay a total of $145 million to settle that they misled millions of consumers seeking to buy comprehensive health insurance. The FTC alleged that both Assurance and MediaAlpha deceived consumers and led them to purchase plans that did not provide the promised health care coverage, and bombarded consumers with telemarketing and robocalls.
Match Group, Inc.
The Federal Trade Commission has sued online dating service Match Group, Inc. (Match), the owner of Match.com, Tinder, OKCupid, PlentyOfFish, and other dating sites, alleging that the company used fake love interest advertisements to trick hundreds of thousands of consumers into purchasing paid subscriptions on Match.com. The agency also alleges that Match has unfairly exposed consumers to the risk of fraud and engaged in other allegedly deceptive and unfair practices. For instance, the FTC alleges Match offered false promises of “guarantees,” failed to provide services to consumers who unsuccessfully disputed charges, and made it difficult for users to cancel their subscriptions.
Vision Online Inc. and Ganadores IBR, Inc., FTC v.
Under the terms of proposed federal court orders, several defendants in the case—including the companies behind Ganadores, the companies’ owners and managers Richard and Sara Alvarez, and an employee who played a key role in the marketing of the scheme, Bryce Chamberlain—will be permanently banned from selling ecommerce or real estate coaching services and will be required to turn over substantial assets to the FTC, which will be used to provide refunds to consumers harmed by the scam
IM Mastery
The Federal Trade Commission and the State of Nevada are taking action to stop a wide-ranging investment training and business venture scam that has bilked consumers out of more than $1.2 billion. According to the complaint filed by the FTC and the Nevada Attorney General, the scam currently operates as IYOVIA and has also used the brand names IM Mastery Academy, iMarketsLive, and IM Academy (collectively, “IML”).
On Aug. 7, 2025, the FTC announced that three of the defendants, Global Dynasty Network, LLC, Jason Brown, and Matthew Rosa, agreed to a settlement of the allegations.
Media/Alpha
In August 2025, the FTC announce Assurance IQ, LLC and MediaAlpha, Inc. will pay a total of $145 million to settle that they misled millions of consumers seeking to buy comprehensive health insurance. The FTC alleged that both Assurance and MediaAlpha deceived consumers and led them to purchase plans that did not provide the promised health care coverage, and bombarded consumers with telemarketing and robocalls.
Asbury Automotive Group, Inc., et al., In the Matter of
The Federal Trade Commission is acting against a large automotive dealer group, Asbury Automotive, for systematically charging consumers for costly add-on items they did not agree to or were falsely told were required as part of their purchase. The FTC also alleges that Asbury discriminates against Black and Latino consumers, targeting them with unwanted and higher-priced add-ons.
In an administrative complaint, the FTC alleges that three Texas dealerships owned by Asbury that operate as David McDavid Ford Ft. Worth, David McDavid Honda Frisco, and David McDavid Honda Irving, along with Ali Benli, who acted as general manager of those dealerships, engaged in a variety of practices to sneak hidden fees for unwanted add-ons past consumers. These tactics included a practice called “payment packing,” where the dealerships convinced consumers to agree to monthly payments that were larger than needed to pay for the agreed-upon price of the car, and then “packed” add-on items to the sales contract to make up that difference.
Philip Serpe, In the Matter of
Amazon.com, Inc. (ROSCA), FTC v.
The Federal Trade Commission is taking action against Amazon.com, Inc. for its years-long effort to enroll consumers into its Prime program without their consent while knowingly making it difficult for consumers to cancel their subscriptions to Prime.
In a complaint filed today, the FTC charges that Amazon has knowingly duped millions of consumers into unknowingly enrolling in Amazon Prime. Specifically, Amazon used manipulative, coercive, or deceptive user-interface designs known as “dark patterns” to trick consumers into enrolling in automatically-renewing Prime subscriptions.
Amazon also knowingly complicated the cancellation process for Prime subscribers who sought to end their membership. The primary purpose of its Prime cancellation process was not to enable subscribers to cancel, but to stop them. Amazon leadership slowed or rejected changes that would’ve made it easier for users to cancel Prime because those changes adversely affected Amazon’s bottom line.
FBA Machine/Passive Scaling, FTC v.
In June 2024, the FTC filed suit against FBA Machine and Bratislav Rozenfeld (also known as Steven Rozenfeld and Steven Rozen) alleging that, in a business opportunity scheme, they falsely guaranteed that consumers could make money operating online storefronts using AI-powered software. The defendants allegedly failed to deliver on the promised earnings claims and defrauded consumers out of over $15 million.
As a result of the FTC’s complaint, a federal court issued an order temporarily halting the scheme and putting it under the control of a receiver.
The FTC later added Amanda Peremen, Rozenfeld’s wife, as a relief defendant in the case. The amended complaint alleged that, though not directly involved in the scheme, she received proceeds from it.
In July 2025, the FTC announced that Rozenfeld will be permanently banned from selling business opportunities in settlement of FTC’s allegations and will be required to turn over the contents of multiple financial accounts and any funds realized upon the sale of real estate property. The proceeds will be used for consumer redress.
Chase Nissan/Manchester City Nissan
The Federal Trade Commission and the State of Connecticut are taking action against auto dealer Manchester City Nissan (MCN), along with its owner and a number of key employees, for systematically deceiving consumers about the price of certified used cars, add-ons, and government fees.
The complaint alleges that the dealership, in addition to deceiving consumers, regularly charges them junk fees for certification, add-on products, and government charges without the consumers’ consent, sometimes costing them thousands of dollars in unwanted and unauthorized charges.
SL Finance
The Federal Trade Commission has stopped a pair of student loan debt relief schemes that it says bilked students out of approximately $12 million by using deceptive claims about repayment programs and loan forgiveness that did not exist. The agency also says the companies falsely claimed to be or be affiliated with the Department of Education and told students that the illegal payments the companies collected would count towards their loans.
After the FTC filed complaints seeking to end the deceptive practices, a federal court temporarily halted the two schemes and froze their assets.
In early October 2023, SL finance and BCO Consulting were permanently banned from the debt relief industry and ordered to turn over their assets as part of a settlement with the Federal Trade Commission.
In July 2025, the FTC issued more than $356,900 in payments to consumers harmed by SL Finance.
PepsiCo Inc., FTC v.
Accelerated Debt Settlement
In July 2025, at the Federal Trade Commission’s request, a federal court temporarily halted an alleged debt relief services scheme that targeted seniors, including veterans, using a wide range of deceptive conduct, including falsely impersonating consumers’ banks and credit card companies as well as government agencies.
Support King, LLC (SpyFone.com), In the Matter of
The FTC approved a proposed order banning SpyFone and its CEO Scott Zuckerman from the surveillance business over allegations that the stalkerware app company secretly harvested and shared data on people’s physical movements, phone use, and online activities through a hidden device hack.