On September 19, a California federal court dismissed three of the six claims against a computer networking equipment manufacturer, including an allegation of unfair practices under the FTC Act.

On July 22, 2016, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Federal Reserve Board and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency issued a proposal with respect to the method for making...

State attorneys general from sixteen jurisdictions are pushing the Federal Trade Commission to extend its Rule on Unfair and Deceptive Fees to cover online food delivery platforms. The coalition raises concerns about drip pricing, dynamic pricing algorithms, and personalized pricing practices that may prevent consumers from making informed purchasing decisions in this rapidly growing industry.

As we posted yesterday, the FTC announced a proposed rule that could fundamentally alter how businesses across industries advertise prices and disclose fees to consumers. At around the same

A discussion on whether your institution is providing clear and conspicuous notice of fees to their consumers.

The court order seeks further information from the parties regarding out-of-pocket costs to consumers for the unauthorized purchases.

What separates aggressive comparative advertising from misleading pricing claims? A recent NAD decision involving Harry's and Gillette examines when brands can rely on regular retail prices versus promotional discounts, and how far marketers can push provocative language like "you're getting ripped off" without crossing legal boundaries.

On Monday, November 14, 2016, the Assembly Environment and Solid Waste Committee will consider the Assembly version (A2338) of Senator Lesniak's amendments to the Pet Purchase Protection Act (S63).

November 19, the FDIC announced the release of the first in a series of three new technical assistance videos developed to assist bank employees in meeting regulatory requirements.

President Donald J. Trump nominated Kathleen Laura Kraninger to serve as Director of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.

On January 20, 2015, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau finalized two minor modifications to the "Know Before You Owe" mortgage disclosure rules.

Steptoe partner Matt Bathon authored an article titled "ITC Can Be Your Ally in Fight Against Unfair Competition From Imported Goods" for Bloomberg Law.

The complaint alleges that the company failed to inform consumers adequately of the practice and intentionally withheld the information.

The non-profit organization uses political robocalls as part of its various campaigns to inform voters about candidates and their positions on veterans' issues.

As publishers increasingly rely on more modern methods of native advertising, the FTC has published a new guidance on enforcement that clarifies when native advertising may cross the line and become deceptive to consumers.

The FTC alleged that between 2006 and early 2013, the company failed to conduct annual recertifications of companies in accordance with its own published standard.

We have partnered with Bloomberg BNA to create a comprehensive guide to federal laws governing unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices.

When does harmless puffery turn into a claim that needs proof? This episode examines a recent NAD decision involving Howies Hockey's "World's Highest Quality" advertising claim, exploring how context transformed a seemingly innocuous slogan into an objective representation requiring substantiation. The decision reveals how even broad boasts may lose their puffery protection when surrounded by specific, measurable product claims.

In July 2014, Morrison & Foerster partners Nancy Thomas and David Fioccola and associate Jessica Kaufman authored the client alert "The CFPB's Most Recent Consent Order: Defining 'Abusive' Acts and Practices Through Enforcement."

Texas has become the first state to hold TikTok legally liable for deceiving parents about platform safety and exposing minors to harmful content. District Judge Cory Liu's landmark ruling confirms that social media companies face direct accountability under state consumer protection laws when their marketing conceals digital dangers from families, setting a precedent for state-level enforcement against technology platforms.