Legal Library: Cases and Proceedings

The operators of an alleged grant scam called Grant Bae that targeted minority-owned businesses will face a permanent ban from grant-writing and business consulting services as a result of a lawsuit brought against them by the Federal Trade Commission and the State of Florida.

In their complaint against Grant Bae, the FTC and Florida alleged that Grant Bae and its owner, Treashonna P. Graham, scammed businesses out of money, sometimes thousands of dollars each, with false promises of “guaranteed” grant funding and COVID-19 economic benefits that did not materialize.

The FTC sued to stop a Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) provider, XCast Labs, Inc., that continued to funnel hundreds of millions of illegal robocalls through its network, even after receiving multiple warnings.

On January 2, 2024, XCast Labs, Inc., agreed to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that it funneled hundreds of millions of illegal robocalls through its network, even after receiving multiple warnings about the unlawful conduct.

Under the proposed court order, XCast Labs will be required to implement a screening process and end its relationships with firms that are not complying with telemarketing-related laws. The Department of Justice litigated the case and filed the proposed order on the FTC’s behalf.

The Federal Trade Commission sued to block John Muir Health’s proposed $142.5 million deal to acquire sole ownership of San Ramon Regional Medical Center, LLC from current majority owner Tenet Healthcare Corporation, saying the deal will drive up health care costs.

The Commission issued an administrative complaint and authorized a lawsuit in federal court alleging the proposed acquisition will eliminate head-to-head competition between John Muir Health and nearby San Ramon Regional Medical Center.

On December 18, 2023  the FTC and California moved to dismiss their federal court case and the FTC dismissed its administrative challenge following John Muir announcing it would terminate its proposed deal to acquire Tenet’s remaining interest in San Ramon Medical Center.

On December 13, 2023, the FTC moved to dismiss its case challenging the transaction following Sanofi’s decision to terminate its transaction with Maze Therapeutics Inc.

In August 2023, the FTC reached a proposed consent order with Amgen Inc. to address the potential competitive harm that would result from Amgen’s $27.8 billion acquisition of Horizon Therapeutics plc. As part of a nationwide settlement of their challenge to the acquisition, the FTC and attorneys general from six states – California, Illinois, Minnesota, New York, Washington, and Wisconsin – also dismissed the related federal court preliminary injunction action, allowing the transaction to proceed, with the conditions imposed by the order. In December 2023, the FTC finalized the consent order with Amgen Inc. and appointed a monitor.

The Federal Trade Commission has taken action against credit services company Credit Karma for deploying dark patterns to misrepresent that consumers were “pre-approved” for credit card offers. The FTC alleges that the company used claims that consumers were “pre-approved” and had “90% odds” to entice them to apply for offers that, in many instances, they ultimately did not qualify for. The agency’s order requires the company to pay $3 million that will be sent to consumers who wasted time applying for these credit cards and to stop making these types of deceptive claims.

In January 2023, the Commission finalized the order in this case.

 In October 2024, the Federal Trade Commission sent more than $2.5 million to consumers who were misled by deceptive claims from credit services company Credit Karma.

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.

The Federal Trade Commission and the State of Florida have filed suit against Chargebacks911 for unfairly thwarting consumers who were trying to dispute credit card charges through the chargeback process.

In a complaint filed in federal court, the FTC and Florida charged that, since at least 2016, the “chargeback mitigation” company and its owners, Gary Cardone and Monica Eaton Cardone, have used multiple unfair techniques to prevent consumers from successfully winning chargeback disputes.

Chargebacks911 and its owners have agreed to a settlement that will prohibit them from working with certain high-risk clients and using deceptive tactics to stop consumers trying to dispute credit card charges through the chargeback process.

In January 2023, the FTC issued an order requiring Denver-based HomeAdvisor, Inc. – a company affiliated with Angi, formerly known as “Angie’s List” – to pay up to $7.2 million for using a wide range of deceptive and misleading tactics in selling home improvement project leads to service providers, including small businesses operating in the “gig” economy. The Commission announced approval of the final consent order in April 2023.

In November 2023, the FTC announced that California-based CRI Genetics, LLC (CRI) will pay a $700,000 civil penalty and will be barred from a wide range of deceptive practices to settle charges from the Commission and the California Attorney General that the company deceived users about the accuracy of its DNA reports.

In November 2018, the FTC announced that a federal district court in Maryland issued an order temporarily shutting down the largest overseas real estate investment scam the FTC has ever targeted. According to the FTC, the scam was established by Andris Pukke, a recidivist scammer currently living in California, and he perpetuated it even while serving a prison sentence for obstruction of justice. The alleged scheme took in more than $100 million, marketing lots in what supposedly would become a luxury development in Central America known by several names, including Sanctuary Belize, Sanctuary Bay, and The Reserve. The FTC alleged that the defendants misled consumers when selling these lots, lying about how risky investments in the development were, how the development was funded, what would be done with money paid for lots, what amenities the development would have, the timeframe those amenities would be built, consumers’ ability to resell lots, and Andris Pukke’s involvement. Several defendants settled prior to the January 2020 trial.

In late August 2020, the district court issued its verdict, finding in favor of the FTC. In early 2021, the court issued final orders against Andris Pukke, Peter Baker, Luke Chadwick, John Usher, and the corporate defendants, limiting what types of business they can engage in moving forward and entering a $120.2 million judgment against them. The defendants appealed and largely lost. During the appeal, Luke Chadwick settled, turning over certain assets and agreeing to a modified order further limiting the types of business he can engage in. After the appeal, the district court entered an order confirming that Andris Pukke, Peter Baker, and John Usher must turn over $120.2 million as well as the corporate defendants and their assets to compensate their victims.  In August 2023, the FTC sent approximately $10 million to consumer defrauded by the Sanctuary Belize investment scheme.

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.