FTC Invites Further Public Comment on Mobile Security

The Federal Trade Commission is seeking comments from the public to further explore issues raised by last year’s FTC forum examining the state of mobile security. Panelists at the forum discussed a number of complex issues that warrant further public input.

Held on June 4, 2013, the FTC’s mobile security forum consisted of a day-long series of panel discussions and presentations that addressed a wide array of security issues in the mobile arena, including current and potential future threats to user privacy and security, the role that mobile platform providers can play to mitigate mobile threats and ensure the privacy and security of end-users, the unique security challenges posed by the complexity of the mobile ecosystem and the role that telecommunications companies, third-party developers, and other members of the ecosystem can play in securing consumer products and services, and the efficacy and utility of consumer-facing mobile security products, such as authentication and antivirus products.

To expand the record on these issues with an eye towards a report, the FTC invites comment from the public on the following topics:

Secure Platform Design: Commenters may interpret the term “platform” broadly to include mobile operating system providers, device manufacturers, app stores, or others that maintain two-sided markets for third-party developers and consumers.  In some cases, a platform may serve several of these roles (e.g., providing a mobile operating system and an app store).

  • How can platforms create robust development environments while limiting the potential for abuse by privacy-infringing or malicious third-party applications? Commenters may interpret the term “application” broadly to include any mobile software (e.g., native, web-based, etc.) that has access, via a platform, to consumers’ personal information or device resources. 
  • Have particular design approaches proven more or less effective than others in protecting consumer privacy and security?
  • What, if any, are the trade-offs between different approaches to providing developers with access to consumers’ personal information or device resources?

Secure Distribution Channels:

  • What role should platforms play in creating secure distribution channels, such as app stores, for mobile applications? 
  • Is application review and testing scalable given the explosive growth of mobile applications?  What techniques have proven effective in detecting malicious or privacy-infringing applications? 
  • Do smaller players in the mobile ecosystem, such as third-party app stores, have the resources to deploy such techniques? 
  • Does limiting application distribution to a single channel provide substantial security benefits?  What, if any, are the trade-offs of this approach? 
  • What are potential alternative approaches to detecting or impeding malicious or privacy-infringing applications on end-user devices? 

Secure Development Practices:

  • What resources (e.g., application programming interfaces, development guides, testing tools, etc.) are available for third-party developers interested in secure application development? 
  • Is the developer community taking advantage of these resources?  Are they making common security mistakes?
  • Do consumers have the information they need to evaluate the security of an application?  Are they aware of potential security risks (e.g., the insecure transmission of data)?  Are there ways to make the security of applications more transparent to the end-user?
  • What more can platforms and other industry players do to ensure that third-party developers have the resources and incentives necessary to implement secure development practices?

Security Lifecycle and Updates:

  • What is the security lifecycle of a mobile device – that is, how long is a mobile device supported with respect to security?  Do companies distinguish between a mobile device’s general product lifecycle and its security lifecycle?  What factors – technical, policy, or business – affect the length of a mobile device’s security lifecycle?
  • What are consumer expectations with respect to the security lifecycle of their mobile devices?  Do consumers have the appropriate information (e.g., at the time of purchase) to factor security into their device purchasing decision?  Do consumers receive notice when a device has reached “end-of-life” with respect to security support? 
  • What are the challenges in creating, testing, and distributing security updates to end-user devices? What, if any, are the implications of slow update cycles?  Are there steps that platforms, manufacturers, telecommunications carriers, and other players can take to streamline this process?

Those wishing to submit responses should follow the instructions provided in the comment submission statement for this matter.

The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish, visit the FTC’s online Complaint Assistant or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to more than 2,000 civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad. The FTC’s website provides free information on a variety of consumer topics. Like the FTC on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, and subscribe to press releases for the latest FTC news and resources.

Marketer of Robocalling Services Banned from Telemarketing

The head of an operation that enabled telemarketers to make illegal robocalls, call phone numbers on the National Do Not Call Registry, and mask Caller ID information, is permanently banned from telemarketing and robocalling under a settlement with the federal government.

In November 2011, on the Federal Trade Commission’s behalf, the Department of Justice filed a complaint alleging that Joseph Turpel sold services to telemarketers who were violating the FTC’s Telemarketing Sales Rule.  The complaint alleged that Turpel knew, or consciously avoided knowing, that clients used his services while calling numbers on the National Do Not Call Registry, transmitting inaccurate caller ID information, and making illegal prerecorded telemarketing solicitations (robocalls).

According to the complaint, Turpel’s clients offered credit card services, home security systems, and grant procurement programs. He allegedly gave clients the means to hide their identity by transmitting inaccurate caller names, such as “SERVICE MESSAGE” or “SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT,” on caller ID displays.

In addition to banning Turpel from telemarketing and robocalling, the settlement order imposes a $395,000 civil penalty that is suspended based on his inability to pay. The full penalty will become due immediately if Turpel is found to have misrepresented his financial condition.

The Commission vote authorizing DOJ staff to file the proposed  stipulated final order was 4-0. The final order was entered by the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on April 15, 2014.

The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish, visit the FTC’s online Complaint Assistant or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to more than 2,000 civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad. The FTC’s website provides free information on a variety of consumer topics. Like the FTC on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, and subscribe to press releases for the latest FTC news and resources.

Statement of FTC Bureau of Competition Director Deborah Feinstein On Jostens’ Decision to Drop its Proposed Acquisition of American Achievement Corp.

Following today’s announcement by Jostens, Inc. (“Jostens”) that it will drop plans to acquire Acquisition of American Achievement Corp. (“AAC”), the Director of the Federal Trade Commission’s Bureau of Competition, Deborah Feinstein, said:

“The parties’ abandonment of the transaction preserves competition for consumers in the markets for class rings, which are an important memento for millions of high school and college graduates across the country.  A combination of two of the three leading manufacturers would have led to higher prices and lower quality for the students and their parents who purchase these rings.”

Earlier today the FTC voted to seek a preliminary injunction in federal court to stop Jostens, one of the nation’s largest sellers of high school and college class rings, from proceeding with the approximately $500 million proposed acquisition of its close rival, AAC. 

The FTC charged that the proposed combination of Jostens and AAC would likely have been anticompetitive and led to higher prices and reduced service for both high school and college students who buy class rings.

The FTC also approved an administrative complaint, alleging that a combined Jostens/AAC would control an unduly high percentage of the high school and college rings markets, making it a dominant firm with only one smaller meaningful competitor in both markets.  Jostens’ acquisition of AAC would have eliminated head-to-head competition between the two companies, allowing the combined firm to raise prices, while reducing the incentives to provide better quality and service to students and make it easier for the two remaining competitors to coordinate, the complaint alleged. 

The Commission vote to file both the administrative complaint and federal district court complaint seeking a preliminary injunction was 4-0.

NOTE:  The Commission files a complaint when it has “reason to believe” that the law has been or is being violated and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. The complaint is not a finding or ruling that the defendant has actually violated the law. The cases will be decided by the court.

The FTC’s Bureau of Competition works with the Bureau of Economics to investigate alleged anticompetitive business practices and, when appropriate, recommends that the Commission take law enforcement action. To inform the Bureau about particular business practices, call 202-326-3300, send an e-mail to antitrust{at}ftc{dot}gov, or write to the Office of Policy and Coordination, Bureau of Competition, Federal Trade Commission, 601 New Jersey Ave., N.W., Room 7117, Washington, DC 20001. To learn more about the Bureau of Competition, read Competition Counts. Like the FTC on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, and subscribe to press releases for the latest FTC news and resources.

Former FTC Chairman Janet D. Steiger Named Recipient of 2014 Kirkpatrick Award

Federal Trade Commission Chairwoman Edith Ramirez today named former FTC Chairman Janet Dempsey Steiger the 2014 recipient of the Miles W. Kirkpatrick Award for Lifetime FTC Achievement, honoring her steadfast commitment to public service and her many significant contributions to the agency.

“Chairman Steiger was an extraordinary public servant who provided inspiring leadership during her tenure at the FTC,” Ramirez said. “As the first woman to lead the FTC, she reinvigorated the agency’s law enforcement, developed its international advisory role, and fostered deep working relationships with state enforcers. And above all, she created an esprit de corps that has made the FTC not just a workplace but a community.”

At the request of Presidents Carter, Reagan, Bush and Clinton, Steiger, who passed away in 2004, served as Commissioner and Chairman of the Postal Rate Commission, then as Chairman of the FTC from August 1989 to April 1995, and as Commissioner of the agency until September 1997.

Among her major accomplishments as FTC Chairman, Steiger obtained congressional reauthorization of the agency in 1994. Under her leadership, the FTC, jointly with the Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division, issued several groundbreaking policy statements, including the 1992 DOJ/FTC Horizontal Merger Guidelines, the 1994 DOJ/FTC Statements of Antitrust Enforcement Policy in Healthcare, and the 1995 DOJ/FTC Antitrust Guidelines for the Licensing of Intellectual Property. Steiger also began the FTC’s international program to protect consumers and promote competition around the world.

The Kirkpatrick Award was established in 2001 to honor the commitment and talent of individuals who have made lasting and significant contributions to the FTC throughout their public and private careers. It is named after former Chairman Miles Kirkpatrick, who is noted for his distinguished legal career and leadership advocating for FTC revitalization and reform. Previous recipients of the award include Basil J. Mezines, Robert Pitofsky, Jodie Bernstein, Caswell O. Hobbs, III, Calvin J. Collier, Thomas B. Leary, Mary Gardiner Jones, Timothy J. Muris, and William E. Kovacic.

The Federal Trade Commission is celebrating 100 years of promoting competition and protecting consumers through law enforcement, policy and research initiatives, and consumer and business education. File a consumer complaint online or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). To inform the Bureau of Competition about questionable business practices, write to [email protected] or call 202-326-3300. Like the FTC on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, and subscribe to press releases for the latest FTC news and resources.

FTC Approves Toys “R” Us Petition to Reopen and Modify 1998 Final Commission Order

Following a public comment period, the Federal Trade Commission has approved a petition submitted by Toys “R” Us, Inc. (TRU) to reopen and modify a final Commission order issued in 1998. That order followed a Commission determination, affirmed by the Seventh Circuit, Toys ‘R’ Us, Inc. v. FTC, 221 F.3d 928 (7th Cir. 2000) holding that, among other things, TRU had used its significant market power to orchestrate a “hub and spoke” conspiracy among its suppliers to restrict the supply of toys to certain warehouse clubs that would otherwise have competed against TRU.

According to TRU’s petition, submitted in January 2014, the growth of Walmart and Target, and emergence of online retailers such as Amazon.com, has reshaped competition among purchasers and sellers of toys. The Commission has modified the 1998 final order to set aside the provisions in Section II that restricted TRU’s ability to enter into certain conditional supply relationships.

The petition stated that while TRU did not seek to modify or set aside the final order’s core prohibition on facilitating or attempting to facilitate unlawful collusion, it was seeking FTC approval to set aside three paragraphs in Section II.  TRU contended that eliminating these sections would allow it to engage in procompetitive (or neutral) vertical conduct that could allow it to compete more effectively.

The Commission vote approving the petition and order modification was 4-0. Copies also can be found on the FTC’s website and as a link to this press release. The FTC responded to one public comment on the petition. (FTC File No. 131-0052, Docket No. C-4405; the staff contact is Roberta Baruch, Bureau of Competition, 202-326-2861)

The FTC’s Bureau of Competition works with the Bureau of Economics to investigate alleged anticompetitive business practices and, when appropriate, recommends that the Commission take law enforcement action. To inform the Bureau about particular business practices, call 202-326-3300, send an e-mail to antitrust{at}ftc{dot}gov, or write to the Office of Policy and Coordination, Bureau of Competition, Federal Trade Commission, 601 New Jersey Ave., N.W., Room 7117, Washington, DC 20001. To learn more about the Bureau of Competition, read Competition Counts. Like the FTC on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, and subscribe to press releases for the latest FTC news and resources.

FTC Approves Final Order Settling Charges That Community Health Systems, Inc.’s Acquisition of Health Management Associates Inc. was Anticompetitive in Two Local Markets

Following a public comment period, the Federal Trade Commission has approved a final consent order settling charges that Community Health Systems, Inc.’s (CHS) $7.6 billion acquisition of rival health care system Health Management Associates Inc. (HMA) was likely to lessen competition for general acute care inpatient services sold to commercial health plans and provided to commercially insured patients in two local geographic markets.  Absent relief, CHS’s acquisition of HMA would eliminate valuable price and quality competition that has benefitted local patients in Etowah County, including the city of Gadsden, Alabama and Darlington County, South Carolina, according to the FTC’s January 2014 complaint.

Under the final settlement with the FTC CHS will sell the Riverview Regional Medical Center and all of its associated operations and businesses near Gadsden, Alabama, and the Carolina Pines Regional Medical Center and its associated operations and businesses near Hartsville, South Carolina, to Commission-approved buyers within six months.

The Commission vote approving the final order and response to the one public comment received was 4-0. (FTC File No.131-0202; the staff contact is Katherine Ambrogi, Bureau of Competition, 202-326-2205)

The FTC’s Bureau of Competition works with the Bureau of Economics to investigate alleged anticompetitive business practices and, when appropriate, recommends that the Commission take law enforcement action. To inform the Bureau about particular business practices, call 202-326-3300, send an e-mail to antitrust{at}ftc{dot}gov, or write to the Office of Policy and Coordination, Bureau of Competition, Federal Trade Commission, 601 New Jersey Ave., N.W., Room 7117, Washington, DC 20001. To learn more about the Bureau of Competition, read Competition Counts. Like the FTC on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, and subscribe to press releases for the latest FTC news and resources.

April is Financial Literacy Month

April is Financial Literacy Month, and the Federal Trade Commission, the nation’s consumer protection agency, has information to help you make the most of your money no matter who you are – student, young adult, parent, service member on active duty, veteran or grandparent.

“If you want to learn about everyday financial issues, like saving and shopping, credit and debt, buying a home or car, or looking for a job or paying for school, the FTC has information for you,” said Jessica Rich, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “Financial Literacy Month is an ideal time to learn – or teach others – the importance of consumers’ rights, and how to file a complaint if something goes wrong.”

Complaints matter at the FTC. If a business doesn’t deliver on its promises, if someone cheats you out of your money, or if you’ve spotted a scam, tell the FTC. Consumer complaints help drive agency investigations. The FTC’s aggressive law enforcement efforts stop fraudulent and deceptive business practices, and its consumer education campaigns empower people to make well-informed buying decisions and recognize frauds and scams.

All of the FTC’s materials are in the public domain. They can be posted, reprinted, or adapted to educate people about their consumer rights.

Visit FTC.gov/MoneyMatters for articles, videos and blog posts about financial topics that you can share in your community.

The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish, visit the FTC’s online Complaint Assistant or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to more than 2,000 civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad. The FTC’s website provides free information on a variety of consumer topics. Like the FTC on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, and subscribe to press releases for the latest FTC news and resources.

FTC Puts Conditions on Akorn Enterprises’ Proposed Purchase of Hi-Tech Pharmacal

Akorn Enterprises, Inc. and Hi-Tech Pharmacal, Inc. will sell the rights and assets to three generic prescription eye medications and two generic topical anesthetics to Watson Laboratories, Inc., to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that Akorn’s proposed $640 million acquisition of Hi-Tech would be anticompetitive and lead to higher prices for consumers.  

The FTC complaint challenging the transaction alleges that the transaction would reduce competition in the markets for:

  • Generic Ciloxan drops, which are eye drops used to treat bacterial eye infections and corneal ulcers. The proposed transaction would reduce from four to three the number of competitors in this already highly concentrated market.
  • Generic Quixin drops, which are eye drops used to treat bacterial eye infections The acquisition would reduce the number of current competitors from three to two.
  • Generic Xylocaine jelly, a topical anesthetic prescription drug, for which the proposed acquisition would reduce the number of competitors from three to two.
  • Generic EMLA cream, a topical anesthetic prescription drug.  The proposed transaction would leave only three remaining competitors, and give the merged firm more than 70 percent of the U.S. market.

Future competition would be reduced in the U.S. market for:

  • Generic Ilotycin ointment, prescribed for bacterial eye infections, which is currently sold by three firms in the U.S.  Hi-Tech is poised to enter the market in the near future.  Akorn’s acquisition of Hi-Tech, therefore, would deprive consumers of the benefits of future competition that would come with Hi-Tech’s entry into this highly concentrated market.

More detailed information about each drug and relevant market can be found in the analysis to aid public comment for this matter.

The proposed order settling the FTC’s charges is designed to remedy the alleged anticompetitive effect of the proposed transaction. It requires the parties to sell either Akorn’s or Hi-Tech’s rights and assets to each of the five drug products to Watson, and requires Akorn to assign Watson its contract for making branded and generic EMLA cream within 10 days after the deal is consummated. If the FTC finds that Watson is not an acceptable acquirer of the drugs, it can require Akorn to unwind the sales and divest the drugs to another FTC-approved buyer within six months. Finally, the proposed order requires the companies to maintain the drugs to be sold as viable, marketable, and competitive pending their divestiture, and allows the FTC to appoint a monitor to ensure that the companies comply with the order’s requirements

The Commission vote to accept the agreement containing the proposed consent order for public comment was 4-0. The FTC will publish a description of the consent agreement package in the Federal Register shortly. The agreement will be subject to public comment for 30 days, beginning today and continuing through May 14, 2014, after which the Commission will decide whether to make the proposed consent order final. Interested parties can submit written comments electronically or in paper form by following the instructions in the “Invitation To Comment” part of the “Supplementary Information” section.

Comments in paper form should be mailed or delivered to:  Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Room H-113, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20580. Comments can also be submitted electronically.

NOTE:  The Commission issues an administrative complaint when it has “reason to believe” that the law has been or is being violated, and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. When the Commission issues a consent order on a final basis, it carries the force of law with respect to future actions. Each violation of such an order may result in a civil penalty of up to $16,000.

The FTC’s Bureau of Competition works with the Bureau of Economics to investigate alleged anticompetitive business practices and, when appropriate, recommends that the Commission take law enforcement action. To inform the Bureau about particular business practices, call 202-326-3300, send an e-mail to antitrust{at}ftc{dot}gov, or write to the Office of Policy and Coordination, Bureau of Competition, Federal Trade Commission, 601 New Jersey Ave., N.W., Room 7117, Washington, DC 20001. To learn more about the Bureau of Competition, read Competition Counts. Like the FTC on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, and subscribe to press releases for the latest FTC news and resources.

FTC to Examine Effects of Big Data on Low Income and Underserved Consumers at September Workshop

The Federal Trade Commission will host a public workshop entitled “Big Data: A Tool for Inclusion or Exclusion?” in Washington on Sept. 15, 2014, to further explore the use of “big data” and its impact on American consumers, including low income and underserved consumers.

“A growing number of companies are increasingly using big data analytics techniques to categorize consumers and make predictions about their behavior,” said FTC Chairwoman Edith Ramirez. “As part of the FTC’s ongoing work to shed light on the full scope of big data practices, our workshop will examine the potentially positive and negative effects of big data on low income and underserved populations.” 

The proliferation of smartphones, social networks, cloud computing, and more powerful predictive analytic techniques have enabled the collection, analysis, use, and storage of data in a way that was not possible just a few years ago. Tremendous benefits flow from the insights of big data, such as advances in medicine, education, and transportation, improved product offerings, more efficient manufacturing processes, and more effectively tailored advertisements. At the same time, concerns have been raised about whether big data may be used to categorize consumers in ways that may affect them unfairly, or even unlawfully.

Companies such as financial institutions, online and brick and mortar retailers, lead generators, and service providers may use big data in the following ways:

  • To reward loyal customers with better customer service or shorter wait times.
  • To offer different prices or discounts to different consumers. For example, a financial institution may offer a consumer a discounted mortgage rate if that consumer has a checking, savings, credit card, and retirement account with a competitor. 
  • To tailor advertising for financial products. For example, high-income consumers may receive offers for “gold level” credit cards and low-income consumers may receive offers for subprime credit cards.
  • To assess credit risks of particular populations. For example, some commentators have highlighted the use of unregulated “aggregate scoring models” that assess credit risks, not based on the credit characteristics of individual consumers, but on the aggregate credit characteristics of groups of consumers who shop at certain stores. 

Such uses of big data are expected to create efficiencies, lower costs, and improve the ability of certain populations to find and access credit and other services. At the same time, these practices may have an unfair impact on other populations, limiting their access to higher quality products, services, or content. 

The Sept. 15 workshop will build on the FTC’s Spring Privacy Seminar Series exploring how the use of big data may affect diverse and underserved populations. The Commission has also examined privacy issues associated with big data practices in its 2012 report Protecting Consumer Privacy In An Era of Rapid Change: Recommendations for Businesses and Policymakers, and its ongoing examination of the data broker industry. The workshop will address the following issues: 

  • How are organizations using big data to categorize consumers? 
  • What benefits do consumers gain from these practices? Do these practices raise consumer protection concerns?
  • What benefits do organizations gain from these practices? What are the social and economic impacts, both positive and negative, from the use of big data to categorize consumers?
  • How do existing laws apply to such practices? Are there gaps in the legal framework?
  • Are companies appropriately assessing the impact of big data practices on low income and underserved populations? Should additional measures be considered?

The workshop will bring together academics, business and industry representatives, and consumer advocates and will be open to the public. The FTC invites comments, reports, and original research from the public on the proposed topics. The submission deadline for pre-workshop comments is Aug. 15, 2014, but the comment period will be held open until Oct. 15. The workshop will be held at the FTC Conference Center, Constitution Center, 400 7th Street SW, Washington, DC, 20024.

The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish, visit the FTC’s online Complaint Assistant or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to more than 2,000 civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad. The FTC’s website provides free information on a variety of consumer topics. Like the FTC on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, and subscribe to press releases for the latest FTC news and resources.

FTC Wins Court Judgment Against Immigration Services Scam

A federal court has ordered the operators of a Baltimore-based immigration services scam to pay as much as $616,000 in refunds to Spanish-speaking immigrants, who were deceived into paying the defendants for immigration services that they were not qualified or authorized to provide. The order bans the defendants from providing or promoting these services in the future.

The court found that some customers “suffered severely” for relying on the defendants. Several were deported and one was arrested and jailed for almost 11 months, according to the court. 

In March 2013, the court found Manuel Alban, his wife Lola Alban, and their company, Loma International Business Group, Inc., liable for violating the FTC Act. Targeting Spanish speakers from El Salvador and Honduras, the Albans misled immigrants to believe they were authorized to provide immigration services for a fee, according to the court. Under federal regulations, except for attorneys, only authorized providers may accept money in exchange for preparing immigration forms on someone else’s behalf.

The court found that although the defendants were not authorized providers, they took in an estimated $479,000 to $753,000 from unsuspecting immigrants. The Court also noted that according to United States Citizenship and Immigration Services data, the agency denied or rejected more than 60 percent of the immigration applications handled by the Albans.

“Misleading people to steal their money and destroy their dreams crosses the line,” said Jessica Rich, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “The FTC is here to protect people from just these kinds of scams.”

The court order requires Manuel Alban and his wife Lola Alban to pay the refund judgment in installments totaling up to $616,000, depending on the number of victims the FTC is able to locate to receive a refund.

In addition to banning the defendants from providing immigration services, the order prohibits them, their employees, and others representing them from misrepresenting anything about goods or services they are promoting – including that they are qualified or authorized to provide immigration or tax preparation services.  It also requires all customer information held by the defendants to be destroyed, and all customer information held by a court-ordered monitor to be turned over to the FTC.

Consumer Information

Spanish-speaking immigrants often are targeted by scammers who call themselves “immigration consultants” or “notarios” – or falsely claim that they are attorneys. The FTC has information in Spanish that explains how to find legitimate free or low-cost immigration advice from authorized providers, and where to report immigration services fraud. Because scammers target immigrants from around the world, the FTC’s immigration-related materials also are in Chinese, Korean, Creole, and Vietnamese.

The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish, visit the FTC’s online Complaint Assistant or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to more than 2,000 civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad. The FTC’s website provides free information on a variety of consumer topics. Like the FTC on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, and subscribe to press releases for the latest FTC news and resources.