FTC’s ROSCA Actions

A review of the FTC's ROSCA actions.

Dec 02, 2019 | Updated August 10, 2022

FTC’s ROSCA Actions

Since 2014, the FTC has brought more than 25 actions alleging violations of the Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act (ROSCA). ROSCA prohibits companies from charging consumers through negative-option offers in internet transactions unless they meet certain requirements, including disclosing all material terms of the transactions, providing consumers with a simple way to stop recurring charges and obtaining consumers’ express informed consent to the charges.

Twenty-seven of the FTC actions since 2014 were filed in federal court and two are administrative actions. Twenty-four of the cases resulted in settlement agreements, and a total of 22 of the cases resulted in monetary judgments or penalties. One of the cases was voluntarily dismissed after a federal court judge entered a judgment in favor of the company. Three of the cases have been stayed and an appeal remains pending in one case. (In addition to the actions listed in the table, the FTC sent a staff advisory opinion regarding ROSCA to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) in 2011.)

The table below contains more detailed information about the FTC’s ROSCA actions:

Defendant(s) (Year)	Type of Action	Status/Outcome	Monetary Penalty or Judgment?
Health Formulas d/b/a Simple Pure Nutrition et al. (2014)	Federal Court Case	Settled	√
JDI Dating et al (2014)	Federal Court Case	Settled	√
One Technologies (2014)	Federal Court Case	Settled	√
DirecTV (2015)	Federal Court Case	Voluntarily dismissed after judgment in favor of defendants
BunZai Media (AuraVie) et al. (2015)	Federal Court Case	12 of the defendants settled; default judgments were entered as to 20 defendants; 1 relief defendant was dismissed	√
Direct Alternatives and Original Organics et al* (2016)	Federal Court Case	Settled	√
Nutraclick f/k/a Hungry Fish Media (2016)	Federal Court Case	Settled	√
DOTAuthority.com et al (2016)	Federal Court Case	Settled	√
Credit Bureau Center (2017)	Federal Court Case	2 defendants settled; Appeal of judgment pending regarding remaining 2 defendants	√**
XXL Impressions et al (2017)	Federal Court Case	Settled	√
AAFE Products/BNRI Corp. et al (2017)	Federal Court Case	Settled	√
RevMountain et al (2017)	Federal Court Case	Settled	√
Hornbeam Special Situations et al (2017)	Federal Court Case	Stayed
Pact Inc. et al (2017)	Federal Court Case	Settled	√
Tarr Inc. et al (2017)	Federal Court Case	Settled	√
AdoreMe (2017)	Federal Court Case	Settled	√
Triangle Media Corp. et al (2018)	Federal Court Case	Settled	√
Redwood Scientific Technologies et al (2018)	Federal Court Case	1 individual defendant settled; default judgments were entered as to all the companies; judgment entered against 2 of the individual defendants
Apex Capital Group et al (2018)	Federal Court Case	Settled	√
Gopalkrishna Pai et al (2019)	Federal Court Case	Stayed
Elite IT Partners et al (2019)	Federal Court Case	Settled
UrthBox et al (2019)	Administrative Action	Settled	√
AH Media Group et al (2019)	Federal Court Case	Settled	√
Match Group (Match.com) (2019)	Federal Court Case	Stayed
MyLife.com, Inc. (2020)	Federal Court Case	Settled	√
Age of Learning, Inc. d/b/a ABCmouse (2020)	Federal Court Case	Settled	√
NutraClick*** (2020)	Federal Court Case	Settled	√
MoviePass, Inc. et al (2021)	Administrative Action	Settled
First American Payment Systems also d/b/a Merimac Capital et al. (2022)	Federal Court Case	Settled	√

* While the FTC did not allege that the defendants in the Direct Alternatives case violated ROSCA, the defendants agreed not to violate ROSCA in the settlement agreement.

** While the district court ordered the defendants to pay monetary penalties, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the restitution award.

*** This lawsuit alleges that company’s deceptive sales and billing practices violated federal law and a court order from a 2016 FTC case.

UPDATED: 8-10-22