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.
Beck's North America, Inc, In the Matter of
General Signal Power Systems, Inc.
Statement of Commissioner Thompson, In the Matter of Intel Corporation
Statement of Commissioner Swindle, In the Matter of Intel Corporation
Asociacion de Farmacias Region de Arecibo, Inc., and Ricardo L.Alvarez Class, individually and as an officer of Associacion de Farmacias Region de Arecibo, Inc.
A pharmacy association in northern Puerto Rico and Ricardo Alvarez Class settled charges that they engaged in an illegal boycott in an attempt to obtain higher reimbursement rates for pharmacy goods and services under the government's managed care plan for the indigent. The consent order prohibits the members of the association and Mr. Class from engaging in joint negotiations for prices and from threatening to boycott or refusing to provide pharmacy services.
Max F. James
New Vision International, Inc., NVI Promotions, L.L.C., Jason P. Boreyko, and Benson K. Boreyko, In the Matter of
Columbia River Pilots
An association of marine pilots in Oregon agreed to settle charges that it monopolized and unreasonably restrained competition in the market for pilotage services on the Columbia River. The consent order prohibits Columbia River Pilots, a group of approximately 40 marine pilots licensed by the state of Oregon to provide navigational assistance to vessels on the Columbia River, from imposing unreasonable noncompete agreements on its members, allocating customers with any competing pilotage group, limiting any competing pilotage group's size, or restricting exclusive dealing contracts or rate proposals.
Five Star Auto Club, Inc., Michael R. Sullivan, and Angela C. Sullivan
PT-1 Communications, Inc., et al.
Lafarge, S.A., and Lafarge Corporation, In the Matter of
To settle FTC charges, LaFarge, Corp. agreed to restructure its agreement to purchase certain assets of Holnam, Inc. LaFarge and Holnam are two of five competitors in the portland cement market in the Puget Sound area. In February 1998, LaFarge and Holnam signed a letter of intent detailing an agreement under which LaFarge would buy Holnam's Seattle cement plant, cement distribution terminal in Vancouver, Washington, a rock quarry in Twin Rivers, Washington, and related assets. The FTC alleged that a provision of the sales agreement between LaFarge and Holnam would have imposed a penalty on LaFarge if it produced quantities of cement in excess of 85 percent of the Holnam plant's capacity. According to the FTC, this provision would encourage LaFarge to restrict the output of cement at the Seattle plant to avoid the production penalty and would prevent an increase in supply and a reduction in price for cement in the Puget Sound area. To restore competition, LaFarge and Holnam agreed to drop the production penalty clause.
Merck & Co., Inc., and Merck-Medco Managed Care, L.L.C
The complaint, issued with the consent order, alleged that as a result of Merck's 1993 acquisition of Medco, the nation's largest benefits manager, Merck's drugs received favorable treatment through Medco's drug-list formulary made available to medical professionals who prescribe and dispense prescriptions to health plan beneficiaries. The consent order requires Medco, among other things, to maintain an "open formulary" to include drugs approved by an independent Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committee, staffed by physicians and pharmacologists who have no financial interest in Merck.