Skip to main content

Displaying 1 - 20 of 50

Uber, FTC v.

The Federal Trade Commission sued Uber Technologies, Inc. and Uber USA LLC (collectively, “Uber”) for alleged violations of Section 5 of the FTC Act and the Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence
Act (“ROSCA”). Among other things, the complaint alleges that Uber charges consumers for its subscription service, Uber One, through a negative option feature but has failed to provide a simple mechanism to stop recurring charges. The complaint also alleges Uber has charged consumers without their consent in violation of the FTC Act and ROSCA. Further, the complaint alleges Uber falsely claims that consumers can cancel Uber One at “any time” with no additional fees.
 

The FTC filed a lawsuit today against Uber, alleging the rideshare and delivery company charged consumers for its Uber One subscription service without their consent, failed to deliver promised savings, and made it difficult for users to cancel the service despite its “cancel anytime” promises.

Type of Action
Federal
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
2423092
Docket Number
3:25-cv-03477
Case Status
Pending

Seven & i Holdings Co., Ltd., In the Matter of

7-Eleven, Inc. and Marathon Petroleum Corporation have agreed to divest retail fuel assets used to sell gasoline and diesel fuel in 293 local markets across 20 states, to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that 7-Eleven’s acquisition of Marathon’s Speedway subsidiary violated federal antitrust laws. The complaint alleges that the acquisition will harm competition for the retail sale of fuel in 293 local markets across Arizona; California; Florida; Illinois; Indiana; Kentucky; Massachusetts; Michigan; North Carolina; New Hampshire; Nevada; New York; Ohio; Pennsylvania; Rhode Island; South Carolina; Tennessee; Utah; Virginia, and West Virginia. In addition to the divestitures, the proposed order prohibits 7-Eleven from enforcing any noncompete provisions as to any franchisees or employees working at or doing business with the divested assets. On November 10, 2021, the Commission announced the final consent agreement in this matter.

The Federal Trade Commission sued 7-Eleven, Inc and its parent company, Seven & i Holdings Co., Ltd., alleging the convenience store chain violated a 2018 FTC consent order by acquiring a fuel outlet in St. Petersburg, Fla. without providing the Commission prior notice.

 

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
201 0108
Docket Number
C-4748
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...

Federal-Mogul Motorparts LLC: In the Matter of

In March 2020, Michigan-based Federal-Mogul Motorparts LLC (Federal-Mogul) agreed to settle an FTC administrative complaint alleging that it made unsubstantiated claims that its aftermarket Wagner OEX brake pads could stop a vehicle in a shorter distance in an emergency and reduce the risk of collisions, as compared to competitors’ brake pads. The proposed order resolving the FTC’s complaint prohibits Federal-Mogul from making such claims in the future, unless they are true and supported by competent and reliable scientific evidence.

Type of Action
Administrative
Last Updated
FTC Matter/File Number
172 3102
Case Status
Pending