1,506 enforcement actions from 16 federal and state jurisdictions. Every event traced back to its official government source.
1,506
Total Actions
16
Jurisdictions
$26.6B+
Total Fines Tracked
The FTC, along with Utah and California, filed a complaint against Hims & Hers alleging the telehealth provider shared consumers' sensitive health information with third-party advertising platforms without consent, and deceived consumers about billing and cancellation practices. The complaint alleges violations of the FTC Act and the Restore Online Shoppers' Confidence Act.
Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison reached a settlement with Annelle Soberay and Omega Dental Care, a defunct dental clinic that shut down in late 2024 without providing advance notice or transitional care to patients. The settlement allows consumers to obtain refunds from the Consumer Protection Restitution Account for fees paid for services that were never provided.
The FTC, along with Alaska, Iowa, Nebraska, and Texas, filed a lawsuit against WPATH alleging the organization made false and unsubstantiated claims about the necessity, safety, and effectiveness of pediatric medical transition services. The complaint alleges WPATH misled parents and children about medical consensus and failed to disclose serious side effects, in violation of the FTC Act.
The FTC sued Amare Global Holdings Inc. and its principals for falsely claiming that dietary supplements like Kids Happy Juice and Kids Mood+ could treat or cure depression, anxiety, and ADHD in children and adults. The FTC also alleged the company misled recruits about their potential earnings as 'brand partners' in its multilevel marketing scheme.
Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier issued subpoenas to Contec, a Chinese medical device manufacturer, and Epsimed, a Miami-based reseller, over allegations that their patient monitors contain backdoors and automatically transmit patient data to China without consent. The companies are accused of violating Florida's Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act by omitting material security vulnerabilities andmaking false representations about FDA approval and product quality. The AG may seek damages, civil penalties, and injunctive relief in future enforcement.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed a lawsuit in the 23andMe bankruptcy case to prevent the sale of Texans' genetic data without proper consent. The action seeks to confirm Texans' property rights over their genetic information under the Texas Data Privacy and Security Act and the Texas Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing Act. The AG argues that 23andMe's proposed asset sale would violate Texas law requiring separate express consent for disclosure of genetic information.
New York Attorney General Letitia James, joined by 27 other state attorneys general and the District of Columbia, filed a lawsuit against 23andMe to block the company’s planned sale of 15 million customers’ genetic and health data without their consent or knowledge. The coalition argues 23andMe must comply with state laws requiring express informed consent for the sale or transfer of sensitive genetic data. The lawsuit seeks to prevent misuse, exposure in future breaches, and unauthorized use of customers’ private genetic information.
Connecticut joined a coalition of 28 attorneys general to object to 23andMe's proposed sale of genetic data in bankruptcy without customer consent. The states argue such sensitive information requires express consent and cannot be sold like ordinary property. Attorney General Tong also advised consumers to delete their data and genetic samples.
The FTC finalized an order against 1Health.io for failing to secure genetic data and unfairly changing its privacy policy. The company must pay $75,000 for consumer refunds, destroy DNA samples, and implement security measures. It deceived consumers about data deletion and shared data without proper consent.
$75K
The FTC settled with genetic testing company 1Health.io for failing to secure sensitive genetic and health data, deceiving consumers about data deletion, and unfairly changing its privacy policy without notice or consent. The settlement includes refunds totaling over $49,500 to 2,432 affected consumers.
$50K
All data sourced from official government enforcement pages.