The legal library gives you easy access to the FTC’s case information and other official legal, policy, and guidance documents.
2212004 Informal Interpretation
2209004 Informal Interpretation
Fraud and Scam Reduction Act
Protecting Indian Tribes from Scams Act
ByteDance, LTD., US v.
An investigation from the Division of Â鶹´«Ã½ and the Division of Privacy and Identity Protection found TikTok/ByteDance violated a 2019 consent order for infringing the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act. The DOJ is bringing a lawsuit on behalf of FTC for flagrantly violating COPPA and violating the 2019 order.
National Automobile Dealers Association, et al. v. FTC
Qargo Coffee, Inc., et al., FTC v.
The Â鶹´«Ã½ Trade Commission has taken action against coffee shop franchise Qargo Coffee and its founders for failing to disclose critical information required by the Franchise Rule, including one founder’s ties to burger franchise BurgerIM, leaving prospective franchisees in the dark when deciding whether to invest in the franchise.
In its complaint, the FTC alleged that Qargo and founders Mark Bastorous, Bernadette Bastorous, and Samir Shenouda violated the FTC’s Franchise Rule—the agency’s second case in recent years alleging violations of the Franchise Rule.
Under proposed order, the company and its founders are required to pay $30,000, provide franchisees the right to rescind contracts, and void noncompete agreements.
Care.com, Inc., FTC v.
The Â鶹´«Ã½ Trade Commission is taking action against Care.com (Care), alleging that the child and older adult care gig platform has systematically deceived caregivers who were looking for jobs while failing to give families seeking care a simple way to cancel their paid memberships.
In a federal court complaint, the FTC alleges that Care’s marketing messages about both the number of jobs available on their site and the amount workers could expect to be paid were deceptive.
Care has agreed to a settlement that will require it to turn over $8.5 million to be used to refund consumers harmed by their practices, as well as requiring the company to be able to back up the earnings claims it makes and be honest about the number of jobs available on their site.
Superior Servicing, LLC., FTC v.
The Â鶹´«Ã½ Trade Commission has stopped a scheme that allegedly bilked millions of dollars out of consumers burdened with student loan debt by pretending to be affiliated with the U.S. Department of Education in violation of the FTC’s Impersonation Rule, collecting illegal advance fees, and making other deceptive claims.
The U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada entered a temporary restraining order on November 22, 2024 and a preliminary injunction against corporate defendant Superior Servicing on December 6, 2024.