Displaying 1 - 20 of 4895
Statement of Chairwoman Edith Ramirez and Commissioner Julie Brill Federal Trade Commission - In the Matter of Ferrellgas Partners, L.P., et al.
Federal Trade Commission Act
Clayton Act
Teva Removes Over 200 Improper Patent Listings Under Pressure from FTC
7-Eleven to Pay Record $4.5 Million Penalty to Settle FTC Antitrust Order Violation Case
Caremark Rx, Zinc Health Services, et al., In the Matter of (Insulin)
The FTC filed a lawsuit against the three largest prescription drug benefit managers (PBMs)—Caremark Rx, Express Scripts (ESI), and OptumRx—and their affiliated group purchasing organizations (GPOs) for engaging in anticompetitive and unfair rebating practices that have artificially inflated the list price of insulin drugs.
Seven & i Holdings Co. Ltd. (Sunoco LP), FTC v.
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.
On December 8, 2025, the FTC announced that 7-Eleven, Inc. and its parent company, Seven & i Holdings Co., Ltd., (collectively 7-Eleven) will pay $4.5 million to settle the Commission's lawsuit.
FTC Bureau of Competition Statement on Termination of Healthcare Managed Services Merger
FTC Requires Boeing to Divest Several Spirit Assets to Proceed with Merger
The Boeing Co. /Spirit AeroSystems Holdings
The Federal Trade Commission will require The Boeing Company (Boeing) to divest significant Spirit AeroSystems Holdings, Inc. (Spirit) assets to resolve antitrust concerns surrounding Boeing’s $8.3 billion acquisition of Spirit.
FTC Endorses Texas Supreme Court’s Proposed Rule Change Eliminating ABA’s Monopoly Control Over Bar Admission
FTC Approves Final Order Prohibiting Noncompete Enforcement by Gateway Services
Gateway Pet Memorial Services
The Federal Trade Commission filed a complaint against Gateway Services and its subsidiary Gateway US Holdings, Inc., (collectively referred to as Gateway), which alleges that Gateway imposed noncompete agreements on almost all of its employees, which typically prohibited employees from working in the pet cremation service industry anywhere in the U.S. for one year after leaving Gateway.
Under a proposed FTC consent order, Gateway must, among other terms, immediately stop enforcing all existing noncompete agreements.
On November 25, 2025, the FTC finalized the consent order in this matter.
GTCR BC Holdings, LLC and Surmodics, Inc., In the Matter of
The Federal Trade Commission issued an administrative complaint to challenge GTCR BC Holdings, LLC’s acquisition of Surmodics, Inc., alleging that the deal, which seeks to combine the two largest manufacturers of critical medical device coatings, is anticompetitive. The FTC charges that private equity firm GTCR’s proposed acquisition of Surmodics would create a combined company controlling more than 50% of the market for outsourced hydrophilic coatings. These coatings are often used by medical device manufacturers and are applied to lifesaving medical devices such as catheters and guidewires.
The Federal Trade Commission filed an amended complaint adding the states of Illinois and Minnesota as co-plaintiffs in the Commission’s lawsuit challenging GTCR BC Holdings, LLC’s (GTCR) acquisition of Surmodics, Inc. (Surmodics). The amended complaint also adds GTCR, LLC as an additional defendant in the case.
FTC Approves Final Consent Order in ACT-Giant Eagle Deal
Alimentation Couche-Tard/Giant Eagle
The Federal Trade Commission took action to protect Americans from paying higher prices at the pump by resolving antitrust concerns surrounding Alimentation Couche-Tard Inc.’s (ACT) proposed $1.57 billion acquisition of 270 retail fuel outlets from grocery store chain Giant Eagle, Inc. Under the proposed consent order, the FTC will require ACT to divest 35 gas stations, which will be acquired by Majors Management, LLC. The consent order settles FTC charges that ACT’s deal with Giant Eagle is anticompetitive and will likely lead to higher fuel costs for consumers across Indiana, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. On November 19, 2025, the FTC finalized the consent order in this matter.