Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

FTC Blog Updates (July 13 – July 24, 2026)

By Joanna Rosen Forster, Kari Ferver & Natalia Rojas-England on August 3, 2026
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

The FTC has been active across both consumer protection and competition spaces in the past two weeks. In the consumer protection space, the Commission announced several proposed settlements with companies and individuals, resolving complaints of alleged deceptive marketing and false advertising. In the competition space, the Commission submitted comments on an Ohio Supreme Court proposal regarding law school accreditation requirements. These stories and more after the jump.

Tuesday, July 14, 2026

Bureau of Competition | American Bar Association (“ABA”)

  • The Ohio Supreme Court issued proposed amendments to change law school accreditation requirements and allow graduates from non-ABA-accredited law schools to sit for the Ohio bar. In response, Brendan Chestnut and Daniel Guarnera, the directors of the FTC’s Office of Policy Planning and Bureau of Competition, respectively, submitted a sixteen-page letter endorsing the proposal. The letter takes the position that the proposal would undermine the ABA’s monopoly over the determination of education requirements for taking the bar examination and practicing law in Ohio. The letter claims that the ABA is “dominated by practicing attorneys, who have strong incentives to limit the supply of lawyers competing to provide legal services.” Thus, the letter argues, moving away from ABA accreditation will lower the cost of legal representation. The letter cites prior FTC correspondence advocating for similar actions to change accreditation in Florida, Tennessee, and Texas. There is no reported timeline for the court to decide the proposal.

Wednesday, July 15, 2026

Bureau of Consumer Protection | Advertising and Marketing

  • The FTC executed a consent agreement with Vanilla Chip LLC in relation to allegations that the company, which does business as TruHeight, deceptively advertised the effectiveness of supplements the company claimed boosted height growth in children and teenagers. The decision and order resolves an April 2026 complaint in which the Commission alleged that the company and its officers had made false or unsubstantiated claims in violation of the FTC Act. Specifically, the height-based growth claims were not backed up with scientific evidence. The complaint also alleged that the company published reviews written by its own employees or vendors, or by consumers who were offered a free product or discount in exchange for a positive review. In addition, the company presented fake social media profiles as belonging to real, existing users. The order imposes a $4 million judgment on TruHeight and its principals, but will be partially suspended after they pay $750,000 as they are unable to pay the full amount.

Monday, July 20, 2026

Bureau of Consumer Protection | Advertising and Marketing | Finance | Credit and Finance | FinTech

  • The FTC announced three proposed settlements resolving its July 2023 complaint against Celsius Network (“Celsius”) and its co-founders, Alexander Mashinsky, Shlomi D. Leon, and Hanoch Goldstein. The FTC’s complaint alleged that the defendants deceptively promised their users that their deposits made to the Celsius cryptocurrency platform would be safe and available for withdrawal at any time, in violation of the FTC Act and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. The complaint also alleged that the defendants failed to maintain enough liquid cryptocurrency to allow users to withdraw their funds on demand and halted users’ withdrawals prior to Celsius filing for bankruptcy. The three proposed orders require Alexander Mashinsky to pay $10 million, Shlomi Leon to pay $4.1 million, and Hanoch Goldstein to pay $2.4 million. The proposed orders also prohibit the defendants from selling or marketing products or services that can be used to deposit or withdraw certain assets, making misrepresentations of any benefits or material facts regarding any product or service, and obtaining or attempting to obtain customer financial information by making misrepresentations.

Tuesday, July 21, 2026

Bureau of Consumer Protection | Advertising and Marketing | Finance | Credit and Finance | FinTech

  • The FTC announced a proposed settlement resolving its March 2025 amended complaint against Superior Servicing LLC, Dennise Merdjanian, Eric Caldwell, and David Hernandez. The FTC’s complaint alleged that the defendants misrepresented their affiliation with the U.S. Department of Education and falsely promised student loan forgiveness as part of their student loan debt relief operation, in violation of the FTC Act, Telemarketing Sales Rule, and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. The complaint also alleged that defendants advertised, marketed, and sold their student loan schemes through deceptive mail and telemarketing practices, collecting illegal initiation fees and monthly payments from students. The proposed order imposes a $45.9 million monetary judgment against Dennise Merdjanian, but will be partially suspended due to her inability to pay the full amount. The proposed order also prohibits the defendants from engaging in debt relief products or services, participating in telemarketing, and misrepresenting and impersonating any government entity or person.
Photo of Joanna Rosen Forster Joanna Rosen Forster

Joanna Forster’s multifaceted background positions her to effectively manage conflicts across the legal spectrum and across the globe. In her prior roles as general counsel (representing both plaintiffs and defendants) and as government prosecutor/enforcer, Joanna handled nearly every type of matter, ranging from

…

Joanna Forster’s multifaceted background positions her to effectively manage conflicts across the legal spectrum and across the globe. In her prior roles as general counsel (representing both plaintiffs and defendants) and as government prosecutor/enforcer, Joanna handled nearly every type of matter, ranging from complex commercial and white collar matters in areas such as employment, intellectual property, securities and antitrust law, to internal investigations and corporate and M&A transactions. She views her role as both a conflict manager, dispensing advice to avoid adversarial action, and as a tech and business litigator, resolving disputes with her client’s business goals in mind.

Having served as the general counsel and compliance officer of a publicly traded ecommerce platform operating in over 60 countries, Joanna has an appreciation of strategic dispute resolution, investigations, and compliance from a general counsel’s perspective. By understanding how business leaders combine the input of in-house and outside counsel to make decisions, Joanna is able to provide her clients with decisive and efficient legal guidance.

Her practice includes litigating domestic and cross-border complex commercial disputes and advising technology and ecommerce companies on matters related to internet platforms, product launches, market campaigns, and new vertical lines of business, all while advising on foreign and domestic laws that regulate online content, physical products, and the companies that bring them to market. Drawing on her experience as the General Counsel of an online e-commerce marketplace, Joanna also regularly advises and counsels clients on California’s Proposition 65, from prevention and compliance to remediation. Joanna is well-versed in key regulations that impact ecommerce companies, including the EU’s Digital Services Act, the U.S. INFORM Act, and the proposed SHOP SAFE Act, as well as laws and regulations that govern online speech such as the Communications Decency Act, Section 230.

Prior to going in-house, Joanna was the deputy attorney general, Corporate Fraud Section of the California Department of Justice. In this capacity, she led large, complex civil matters alleging violations of California’s False Claims Act, Securities Law, Section 17200, Cartwright Act, and other deceptive business practices. She also maintained her own investigations and litigation docket.

Before joining the California Department of Justice, Joanna spent nearly a decade in private practice, where she focused on civil and criminal antitrust and commercial litigation. She also served as a law clerk for the Honorable Consuelo B. Marshall in the U.S. District Court for the Central District Court of California.

Read more about Joanna Rosen ForsterEmailJoanna's Linkedin Profile
Show more Show less
Photo of Kari Ferver Kari Ferver
Read more about Kari FerverEmail
Photo of Natalia Rojas-England Natalia Rojas-England
Email
  • Posted in:
    Antitrust, Competition and Trade, Ethics & Professional Responsibility
  • Blog:
    Retail & Consumer Products Law Observer
  • Organization:
    Crowell & Moring LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo