Markets Wired - Page 1130 of 1413 - Global Financial Market News and Press Releases

FTC Settlement Order Bars Texas Doctors’ Group from Joint Price Negotiations

An association representing 900 physicians in the Amarillo, Texas, area has agreed to a Federal Trade Commission order barring it from jointly negotiating the prices it charges insurance providers. The FTC alleged in a complaint filed with the order that the association, Southwest Health Alliances, Inc., d/b/a BSA Provider Network, has violated federal law since 2000 by fixing the prices its member doctors would charge insurers. This led to higher prices for consumers and businesses.

The FTC order settling the charges prohibits Southwest Health from similar conduct in the future. The association also is settling similar charges brought by the Office of the Texas Attorney General.

Southwest Health is an independent practice association (IPA) consisting of multiple, independent medical practices with approximately 900 physician members – 300 of whom provide primary care services – in the Amarillo area. According to the FTC’s complaint, since at least 2000, the network has restrained competition by entering into and implementing agreements to fix the prices and terms at which it would contract with health plans, and has collectively negotiated the terms and conditions under which it would deal with health plans.

The FTC contends that the agreements eliminated competition and harmed consumers by increasing prices for physician services. Collective price negotiation and agreements between IPAs and health care providers may be justified under some circumstances. For example, if an IPA clinically or financially integrates its members’ practices, this may create efficiencies that justify joint price negotiations. However, because Southwest Health’s doctors undertook no such integration, the agreements produced no beneficial efficiencies for consumers.

The proposed order settling the FTC’s complaint is designed to stop Southwest Health’s allegedly anticompetitive conduct, while allowing it to continue to engage in legitimate joint conduct. To do this, the FTC order bars Southwest Health from entering into or facilitating agreements among physicians: 1) to negotiate on behalf of any physician with any insurer; 2) to negotiate with any physician as an insurer; 3) to deal, refuse to deal, or threaten to refuse to deal with any insurer; and 4) not to deal individually with any insurer, or not to deal with any insurer, except through Southwest Health.

In addition, the proposed order prohibits Southwest Health from facilitating the exchange of information between physicians concerning the terms on which they will contract with insurers. These terms are similar to those found in other FTC cases of this type.

The proposed order does not preclude Southwest Health from engaging in conduct that is reasonably necessary to form or participate in legitimate “qualified risk-sharing” or “qualified clinically integrated” arrangements, as defined in the order. It also does not prohibit agreements that only involve doctors who are part of the same medical practice.

Finally, the proposed order contains notification provisions that will allow the FTC to monitor Southwest Health’s compliance with its terms, and will allow insurers to terminate any contracts, without penalty, entered into with the network since its alleged restraint of trade began in 2000. The proposed order will expire in 20 years.

The Commission vote approving the complaint and proposed settlement order was 5-0. The order will be published in the Federal Register subject to public comment for 30 days, until June 10, 2011, after which the Commission will decide whether to make it final. Comments can be submitted electronically here.

The FTC thanks the Office of the Texas Attorney General for its exemplary work and coordination on this matter.

NOTE: The Commission issues 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 issuance of a complaint is not a finding or ruling that the respondent has violated the law. A consent order is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission of a law violation. 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.

Copies of the complaint, consent order, and an analysis to aid public comment are available from the FTC’s website at http://www.ftc.gov and also from the FTC’s Consumer Response Center, Room 130, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20580. 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 [email protected], or write to the Office of Policy and Coordination, Room 394, Bureau of Competition, Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Ave, N.W., Washington, DC 20580. To learn more about the Bureau of Competition, read Competition Counts. “Like” the FTC on Facebook and “follow” us on Twitter.

(FTC File No. 091-0013)
(Southwest Health.final)

FTC to Host Public Forum on Competition Issues in Standard-Setting

The Federal Trade Commission will host a public workshop on June 21, 2011, in Washington, D.C., as part of a project to examine the legal and policy issues surrounding the competition problem of “hold-up” when patented technologies are included in collaborative standards. The workshop will be free and open to the public.

When industry-wide standards incorporate technologies that are protected by intellectual property rights, they raise the potential for “hold-up” by a patent owner – a demand for higher royalties or other more-costly or burdensome licensing terms after the standard is implemented than could have been obtained before the standard was chosen. Hold-up can subvert the competitive process of choosing among technologies during standard-setting and can undermine the integrity of those activities. Consumers can be harmed if manufacturers are able to pass on higher costs resulting from hold-up.

The FTC workshop will examine three ways to try to prevent hold-up: 1) patent disclosure rules of standard-setting organizations; 2) commitments given by patent holders that they will license users of the standard on reasonable and non-discriminatory (RAND) terms; and 3) disclosure of licensing terms by patent holders before the standard is adopted. The Commission intends to examine these issues from practical, economic and legal perspectives, and under antitrust, contract and patent law. The FTC also will consider whether certain conduct by patent holders is deceptive or unfair.

In a Federal Register notice to be published shortly, the FTC seeks the views of consumers and the legal, academic, and business communities on the issues to be explored in this project

Comments may be filed until July 8, 2011 in electronic form using the following weblink: (https://secure.commentworks.com/ftc/standardsproject) and following the instructions on the web-based form. Comments will be publicly available.

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 and “follow” us on Twitter.

(standard setting)

FTC Charges Utah Operation with Deceptive and Abusive Telemarketing

At the request of the Federal Trade Commission, the Department of Justice today filed a complaint that charges three Utah-based firms and their owner with waging deceptive and illegal telemarketing campaigns pitching movies and soliciting for donations, including calls to more than 16 million phone numbers on the National Do Not Call Registry.

The FTC charged that the companies and their owner, Forrest S. Baker III, committed multiple violations of the FTC Act and the Telemarketing Sales Rule, and deceived customers about where the proceeds from their purchases and their donations would go.

According to the FTC’s complaint, Baker controls a group of Utah-based companies that produce and market films and DVDs and solicit charitable contributions from consumers nationwide, including Feature Films for Families, Inc., Corporations for Character, L.C., and Family Films of Utah.

The complaint states that in 2008 and 2009 the defendants conducted a nationwide calling campaign under the name “Kids First,” in which they offered to send two complimentary DVDs and requested feedback on whether the movies should be included on a list of recommended movies. However, the defendants did not disclose that consumers who agreed to participate would later receive calls pitching DVDs produced by the defendants.

Moreover, the defendants’ telemarketers allegedly told consumers that “all of the proceeds of this fundraiser will help us finish up creating this recommended viewing list to help parents and grandparents, like us, with a list we can trust.” In fact, the organization responsible for the Kids First recommended viewing list, the Coalition for Quality Children’s Media, did not receive all the proceeds. The complaint alleges that the defendants received at least 93 percent of the DVD sales proceeds.

The FTC also alleges that, between 2009 and 2010, the defendants conducted fundraising campaigns for organizations with names related to fraternal orders of police (FOPs) and firefighters. The defendants receive most of the donations raised by these campaigns, and the organizations retain only 15 to 33 percent.

The Commission alleges that, in order to persuade donors to give money, the defendants made multiple false and misleading misrepresentations about the nature or purpose of the organizations for which the defendants requested donations, the way in which charitable contributions will be used, and the percentage or amount of any charitable contribution that will go to an organization. For example, the complaint alleges that the defendants falsely represented to donors that administrative costs are a “very minimal amount” and that contributions were used or would be used for safety-related officer training, bulletproof vests, or financial assistance to victims when, in fact, the organization for which the defendants were soliciting did not fund these activities, or used only an incidental amount of the contributions for such activities.

The FTC’s complaint also alleges that the defendants have repeatedly called numbers on the National Do Not Call Registry in their telemarketing campaigns. In calls made under the name Kids First, the FTC alleges, the defendants made more than five million calls to consumers whose numbers were on the Registry. The complaint further charges that, since June 2007, the defendants have made approximately nine million additional illegal telemarketing calls to phone numbers that are on the Do Not Call Registry to sell Feature Films for Families DVDs.

The FTC alleges that in another calling campaign in 2009, the defendants called consumers to urge them to buy tickets to see “The Velveteen Rabbit,” a film produced by Baker and released in theaters before going to DVD. The FTC complaint alleges that the defendants’ telemarketers made no effort to avoid calling consumers on the Do Not Call Registry. During this two-week campaign, the defendants called more than two-and-a-half-million consumers whose numbers were on the Do Not Call Registry.

In addition, the complaint charges that the defendants violated the Telemarketing Sales Rule by:

calling consumers who have previously asked that the defendants stop calling them;
failing to provide the name of the telemarketer or seller making the call to Caller ID devices and, instead, providing names such as “CUSTOMER SVC,” “FAMILY VALUE CB” or “VELVETEEN”;
failing to orally identify the seller, the purpose of the call, and the nature of the goods or services when making telemarketing calls; and
abandoning calls to consumers by failing to connect consumers to live representatives when they answer the phone. In many cases, such abandoned calls lead to the recipients listening to “dead air” when they answer the call.

The Commission vote referring the complaint to the Department of Justice was 5-0. The complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District for the Northern District of Florida. It names as defendants Feature Films for Families, Inc.; Corporations for Character, L.C.; Family Films of Utah, Inc.; and Forrest Sandusky Baker III, individually and as an owner and principal of Feature Films for Families, Inc., Corporations for Character, L.C., and Family Films of Utah, Inc.

The complaint, filed by the Department of Justice at the request of the FTC, seeks a court order to permanently bar the defendants from violating the FTC Act and the Telemarketing Sales Rule, as well as civil penalties, and disgorgement of their ill-gotten gains.

NOTE: The Commission approves 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 case will be decided by the court.

(FTC File No. 1023023; Civ. No. 11-197)

OnGuardOnline.gov Advises PlayStation Network, Qriocity Users to Take Steps to Reduce ID Theft Risk

Tips for Consumers

May 6, 2011

OnGuardOnline.gov – the federal government’s online security site, managed by the Federal Trade Commission – is offering information to help PlayStation Network and Qriocity users avoid the risk of identity theft following Sony Corporation’s disclosure that those services were hacked and user data may be compromised. It’s not clear at this time what user data was stolen, but the services held user IDs and passwords, e-mail and street addresses, birth dates, credit card numbers and expiration dates, and payment histories.

OnGuardOnline.gov advises PlayStation Network and Qriocity users to take these steps to reduce the risk of identity theft:

If you used your PlayStation ID or password to log in to other accounts, change them – and, since hackers could have your security questions and answers from Sony, use different questions for other accounts.
When you open your e-mail, consider whether any of the messages could be a phishing scam. Having stolen information could make it easier for crooks to send e-mails that appear to be from PlayStation, Sony or even another gamer. If an e-mail asks for your credit card number or Social Security number – don’t give it.
Monitor your financial accounts and billing statements often. If you can’t remember which credit card you used for your PlayStation account, check your e-mail for messages about billing from “[email protected].” If you see charges you don’t recognize, contact your bank or credit card company’s fraud department right away.
Check out your credit report – for free copies, visit www.AnnualCreditReport.com or call 1-877-322-8228. If you see unfamiliar accounts or addresses, or inaccurate information, contact the credit reporting company and the information provider. To learn how to correct errors on your credit report, visit ftc.gov/idtheft.

For more information, see OnGuardOnline.gov.

(PlayStation Hack)

Contact Information

MEDIA CONTACT:

Office of Public Affairs
202-326-2180

FTC Returns More Than $11.8 Million to Consumers Defrauded by Q-Ray Bracelet Scam

An administrator working for the Federal Trade Commission is mailing 248,931 refund checks to consumers defrauded by QT Inc., Q-Ray Company, and Bio-Metal, Inc., and their owner, Que Te Park, also known as Andrew Q. Park, who made false and misleading advertising claims that the Q-Ray bracelet provided immediate and significant pain relief and deceptively advertised their refund policy.

More than $11.8 million is being returned to people who purchased the Q-Ray bracelet and filed a claim form. Purchasers will receive an average of about $47. Consumers who receive the checks should cash them by mid-June 2011. The FTC never requires consumers to pay money or provide information before redress checks can be cashed. Q-Ray consumers with questions should call the redress administrator, Analytics Inc., at 800-269-0056 or visit the FTC’s Q-Ray bracelet webpage.

(Q-Ray redress)

FTC Seeking Public Comments on Application by Tops Markets to Sell Three Former Penn Traffic Supermarkets in Cortland and Ithaca, New York, and Sayre, Pennsylvania

Tops Markets LLC has submitted an application to the Federal Trade Commission seeking approval to sell three supermarkets to Hometown Markets, LLC. Tops is required to sell a total of seven supermarkets in five geographic markets – Bath, Cortland, Ithaca, and Lockport, New York; and Sayre, Pennsylvania – under a proposed FTC order settling charges that Tops’s January 2010 acquisition of the bankrupt Penn Traffic Company supermarket chain would be anticompetitive.

In the application, Tops proposes to sell three supermarkets formerly owned by Penn Traffic located in Ithaca, New York (at 315 Pine Tree Road), Cortland, New York (at 160 Clinton Ave.) and Sayre, Pennsylvania (at 1730 Elmira Street) to Hometown Markets, under an asset purchase agreement dated May 2, 2011.

The Commission is accepting public comments on Tops’s application until June 6, 2011, after which it will decide whether to approve the sales. Written comments should be sent to: FTC Office of the Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Washington, DC 20580. To file a comment, please click here, and follow the instructions at that site. Copies of the application also can be found on the FTC’s website and as a link to this press release. (FTC File No. 101-0074, Docket No. C-4295; the staff contact is Elizabeth A. Piotrowski, Bureau of Competition, 202-326-2623; see press release dated August 4, 2010.)

Copies of the document mentioned in this release are available from the FTC’s website at http://www.ftc.gov and from the FTC’s Consumer Response Center, Room 130, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20580. Call toll-free: 1-877-FTC-HELP.

(FYI 23.2011.wpd)

FTC Approves Dow Chemical Application to Amend Agreement with Huntsman Related to Union Carbide Acquisition

Following a public comment period, the Federal Trade Commission has approved an application by the Dow Chemical Company to amend an agreement related to its 2001 acquisition of Union Carbide Corporation. In order to obtain FTC approval for the merger, Dow entered into a consent agreement designed to remedy the alleged anticompetitive effects of the deal, including an agreement under which Dow agreed to sell its ethyleneamines business to Huntsman International LLC. Ethyleneamines are a family of chemicals used in a variety of applications, including lubricating oil additives, epoxy curing agents, personal care products, pulp and paper products, and fungicides.

As part of the sale, the agreement required Dow to separate the environmental systems of the ethyleneamines business from other systems at its Freeport, Texas, site. In December 2010, Dow entered into the proposed “Deep Well Amendment” with Huntsman. According to the application, the proposed amendment reflects an understanding between Dow and Huntsman regarding a joint wastewater treatment project at the Freeport site. In its application, Dow stated that the proposed Deep Well Amendment is consistent with the FTC’s order and should be approved.

The Commission vote approving the application was 5-0. (FTC File No. 991-0301, Docket No. C-3999; the staff contact is Roberta S. Baruch, Bureau of Competition, 202-326-2861; see press release dated February 5, 2001.)

Copies of the document mentioned in this release are available from the FTC’s website at http://www.ftc.gov and from the FTC’s Consumer Response Center, Room 130, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20580. Call toll-free: 1-877-FTC-HELP.

(FYI 21.2011.wpd)

FTC Settles Charges Against Two Companies That Allegedly Failed to Protect Sensitive Employee Data

Two companies that maintain large amounts of sensitive information about the employees of their business customers, including Social Security numbers, have agreed to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that they failed to employ reasonable and appropriate security measures to protect the data, in violation of federal law. Among other things, the settlement orders require the companies to implement comprehensive information security programs and to obtain independent audits of the programs every other year.

The settlements with Ceridian Corporation and Lookout Services, Inc. are part of the FTC’s ongoing efforts to ensure that companies secure the sensitive consumer information they maintain. In complaints filed against the companies, the FTC charged that both Ceridian and Lookout claimed they would take reasonable measures to secure the consumer data they maintained, including Social Security numbers, but failed to do so. These flaws were exposed when security breaches at both companies put the personal information of thousands of consumers at risk. The FTC challenged the companies’ security practices as unfair and deceptive.

According to the FTC’s complaint against Ceridian, a provider to businesses of payroll and other human resource services, the company claimed, among other things, that it maintained “Worry-free Safety and Reliability . . . Our comprehensive security program is designed in accordance with ISO 27000 series standards, industry best practices and federal, state and local regulatory requirements.” However, the complaint alleges that Ceridian’s security was inadequate. Among other things, the company did not adequately protect its network from reasonably foreseeable attacks and stored personal information in clear, readable text indefinitely on its network without a business need. These security lapses enabled an intruder to breach one of Ceridian’s web-based payroll processing applications in December 2009, and compromise the personal information – including Social Security numbers and direct deposit information – of approximately 28,000 employees of Ceridian’s small business customers.

The other company, Lookout Services, Inc., markets a product that allows employers to comply with federal immigration laws. It stores information such as names, addresses, dates of birth and Social Security Numbers. According to the FTC’s complaint against Lookout, despite the company’s claims that its system kept data reasonably secure from unauthorized access, it did not in fact provide adequate security. For example, unauthorized access to sensitive employee information allegedly could be gained without the need to enter a username or password, simply by typing a relatively simple URL into a web browser. In addition, the complaint charged that Lookout failed to require strong user passwords, failed to require periodic changes of such passwords, and failed to provide adequate employee training. As a result of these and other failures, an employee of one of Lookout’s customers was able to access sensitive information maintained in the company’s database, including the Social Security numbers of about 37,000 consumers.

The settlement orders bar misrepresentations, including misleading claims about the privacy, confidentiality, or integrity of any personal information collected from or about consumers. They require the companies to implement a comprehensive information security program and to obtain independent, third party security audits every other year for 20 years.

The FTC will publish a description of the consent agreement packages in the Federal Register shortly. The agreements will be subject to public comment for 30 days, beginning today and continuing through June 2, after which the Commission will decide whether to make them 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 electronic form should be submitted using the following web links: https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/lookout and https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/ceridian and following the instructions on the web-based form. Comments in paper form should be mailed or delivered to: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Room H-113 (Annex D), 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20580. The FTC is requesting that any comment filed in paper form near the end of the public comment period be sent by courier or overnight service, if possible, because U.S. postal mail in the Washington area and at the Commission is subject to delay due to heightened security precautions.

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. The complaint is not a finding or ruling that the respondent has actually violated the law. A consent agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by the respondent that the law has been violated. 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.

FTC Staff Report Finds 60 Percent Increase in Pharmaceutical Industry Deals That Delay Consumers’ Access to Lower-Cost Generic Drugs

Pharmaceutical companies struck an unprecedented number of deals in Fiscal Year (FY) 2010 in which the manufacturers of branded products paid potential generic rivals and generic companies agreed to defer the introduction of lower-cost medicines for American consumers, according to an overview of industry data released by the staff of the Federal Trade Commission.

The FTC staff report found that the number of these deals skyrocketed more than 60 percent, from 19 in FY 2009 to 31 in FY 2010. Overall, the agreements reached in the latest fiscal year involved 22 different brand-name pharmaceutical products with combined annual U.S. sales of about $9.3 billion.

“Collusive deals to keep generics off the market are already costing consumers and taxpayers $3.5 billion a year in higher drug prices,” said FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz. “The increasing number of these deals is a win-win proposition for the pharmaceutical industry, but a lose-lose for everyone else.”

Millions of Americans rely on generic drugs to make medicine affordable, and generics also help hold down costs for taxpayer-funded health programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. Generic prices are typically at least 20 to 30 percent less than the name-brand drugs, and in some cases are up to 90 percent cheaper.

In recent years, certain brand-name companies have paid generic challengers to settle their patent challenges and delay the introduction of lower-cost medicines. An FTC staff study has found that such settlements that include a payment delay generic entry by 17 months longer on average than those that do not include a payment.

The FTC has challenged a number of these patent settlement agreements in court, contending that they are anticompetitive and violate U.S. antitrust laws. The agency also has supported legislation in Congress that would prohibit settlements that increase the cost of prescription drugs.

The staff report summarizes data on patent settlements filed with the FTC and the Department of Justice during FY 2010. There were a total of 113 final patent settlements. Of those, 31 settlements contained a payment to a generic manufacturer and also restricted the generic’s ability to market its product. Of those 31 settlements, 26 involved generics that were so-called “first filers,” meaning that they were the first to seek FDA approval to market a generic version of the branded drug. Because of the regulatory framework, when first filers delay entering the market, other generic manufacturers can also be blocked from entering the market, which makes such patent settlement deals particularly harmful to consumers.

The staff report issued today also cited three other settlements in FY 2010 that did not record any explicit compensation for the generic, but provided other assurances that may have had the effect of compensating the generic for delaying entry.

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 [email protected] or write to the Office of Policy and Coordination, Room 394, Bureau of Competition, Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Ave, N.W., Washington, DC 20580. To learn more about the Bureau of Competition, read “Competition Counts” at http://www.ftc.gov/competitioncounts.

(FY10 MMA Report)

FTC Announces Public Workshop on Antitrust and Accountable Care Organizations

On Monday, May 9, 2011, the Federal Trade Commission will host a workshop to seek input on the Proposed Statement of Antitrust Enforcement Policy, which discusses how the federal antitrust agencies will enforce U.S. antitrust laws when competing health care providers create new Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) under the Affordable Care Act of 2010. The Act encourages physicians, hospitals, and other health care providers to integrate their health care delivery systems in order to improve the quality and reduce the costs of health care services for U.S. patients. The FTC and the Department of Justice issued the joint proposed Policy Statement on March 31, 2011, and the comment period ends on May 31, 2011.

The 10 am-1 pm workshop will feature a moderated discussion with a variety of industry stakeholders, including health care providers and insurers, as well as academics, health policy and economic experts, and representatives of the FTC and the Department of Justice.

The workshop is free and open to the public, but space is limited and attendees will be admitted on a first-come basis. It will be held at the FTC’s New Jersey Ave. Conference Center at 601 New Jersey Ave., NW, Washington, DC. Details about the workshop, including an agenda and list of speakers, will be posted by Wednesday, May 4, 2011 on the FTC’s ACO website at: http://www.ftc.gov/opp/workshops/aco2/index.shtml.

The event will be webcast live. A link will be available the day of the workshop at http://www.ftc.gov/opp/workshops/aco2/index.shtml. A transcript will be made available after the workshop. Questions for panelists may be submitted via email to [email protected] by May 5, 2011. Other questions about the workshop also may be directed to this email address.

Information about the workshop, the FTC/DOJ Proposed Statement of Antitrust Enforcement Policy, and the proposed rule on ACOs issued by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services may be found at http://www.ftc.gov/opp/aco/index.shtml.

Reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities are available upon request. Requests should be submitted via email to [email protected] or by calling Jessica Hoke at 202-326-2409. Requests should be made in advance. Please include a detailed description of the accommodation needed, and provide contact information.

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.

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Contact Information

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts: