Case Decisions – FTC - Brill Strategies
20032
wp-singular,page-template-default,page,page-id-20032,page-child,parent-pageid-15227,wp-theme-hazel,wp-child-theme-hazel-child,hazel-core-1.0.7,ajax_fade,page_not_loaded,,content_with_no_min_height,select-child-theme-ver-1.1.1,select-theme-ver-4.7,wpb-js-composer js-comp-ver-6.9.0,vc_responsive
 
Case Decisions and Statements

Case Decisions and Statements

(Selected with full list available at Julie Brill | Federal Trade Commission)

  • Brill, Statement on the Federal Trade Commission’s Written Testimony Submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee, on “Reforming the Electronic Communications Privacy Act”, September 16, 2015 (ECPA reform).
  • Brill, In the Matter of Nomi Technologies, Inc., August 28, 2015 and April 23, 2015 (privacy).
  • Brill, Ramirez and McSweeny, In the matter of FTC v. Cephalon, Inc., May 28, 2015 (pay for delay pharmaceutical matter).
  • Brill, Dissenting Statement, In the Matter of Reynolds American, Inc., and Lorillard Inc., May 26, 2015 (tobacco merger).
  • Brill, Ramirez, and Ohlhausen, Regarding the Google Investigation, March 25, 2015 (anticompetitive practices investigation).
  • Brill, Statement on the FTC’s Sixth and Final Report to Congress Under Section 319 of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003, January 21, 2015 (credit reporting).
  • Brill, Concurring Statement, On the Trade Regulation Rule Concerning Cooling-Off Period for Sales Made at Homes or at Certain Other Locations (the “Cooling-Off Rule”), January 6, 2015 (federal and state cooling off rules).
  • Brill, Ramirez, and McSweeny, In the Matter of True Ultimate Standards Everywhere Inc., November 17, 2014 (Truste’s representations regarding certification programs).
  • Brill, Opinion of the Commission, In the Matter of Phoebe Putney Health Systems, Inc., Phoebe Putney Memorial Hospital, Inc., Phoebe North, Inc., HCA, Inc., Palmyra Park Hospital, Inc., and Hospital Authority of Albany-Dougherty County, September 5, 2014 (hospital merger).
  • Brill and Ramirez, In the Matter of i-Health, Inc. and Martek Biosciences Corporation, June 9, 2014 (advertising substantiation).
  • Brill and Ramirez, Concurring Statement, In the Matter of Apple Inc., January 15, 2014 (charges for in-app purchases involving children’s apps)
  • Brill and Ramirez, Concurring Statement, In the Matter of GeneLink, Inc. and foru International Corporation, January 7, 2014 (advertising substantiation).
  • Brill and Ramirez, Concuring Statement, Federal Trade Commission v. Springtech 77376, LLC, et al. (“Cedarcide Industries”), July 16, 2013 (advertising substantiation).

« Back to Articles