Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Date: July 13, 2016
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comThe Federal Trade Commission (FTC) recently announced an adjustment to the maximum civil penalty dollar amounts for violations of 16 provisions of law under the agency’s jurisdiction. The FTC fines hike is noteworthy given the agency’s stepped-up enforcement efforts in a number of key areas, including deceptive advertising, data security, and Clayton Act compliance.

The FTC fines increase is required by the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 2015, which directs agencies to implement a “catch-up” inflation adjustment based on a specific formula. The new maximum civil penalty amounts are scheduled to take effect on August 1, 2016.
The maximum civil penalty amount has increased from $16,000 to $40,000 for the following violations, as well as several others listed in the Federal Register Notice:
The fee hikes are significant for several reasons. First, for businesses contemplating a merger or acquisition, the fee hikes highlight that it is imperative to determine if the transaction will trigger pre-merger notification requirements under the HSR Act. Under the statute, companies proposing a merger or acquisition must notify regulators and satisfy a mandatory waiting period (usually 30 days) if the size of the parties involved and the value of the transaction exceeds certain filing thresholds, absent an applicable exemption.
Second, for continuing violations, each day is a separate violation. As a result, the maximum civil penalty may be multiplied by the number of days for each violation of the applicable statute. Third, courts will apply a multi-factor test in assessing whether a maximum fee could be mitigated. These factors include the degree of culpability of the violator, prior history of the violator’s conduct, the violator’s ability to pay, and the effect on the violator’s ability to continue to do business. Small businesses may also benefit from the agency’s civil penalty leniency program, which establishes criteria the FTC will consider when determining the propriety of a penalty waiver or reduction for small businesses that are not in compliance with the law.
The official FTC notice can be viewed here.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

Case law following the 2010 amendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 offers guidance on how courts are likely to address whether an expert witness’s AI records are subject to discovery. Key Takeaways Rule 26 Expert Discovery After the 2010 Amendments This article addresses the question courts and lawyers have faced in recent cases: […]
Author: Chris Seelinger

“Show how 3M is 0% at fault.” The absurd tale of how a 350-page ChatGPT history for 3M’s expert witness was produced during a deposition is more likely than you think. It’s an inevitable trend, and an unsettled question for federal courts as experts make generative AI part of their workflow. Key Takeaways Expert Witness […]
Author: Chris Seelinger

Screenshots have changed the risks of electronic communications. The screenshot problem is that messages intended for one person or a small group can be copied, forwarded, preserved, and ultimately presented to opposing counsel, regulators, journalists, customers, or a jury. Businesses should recognize that a truly private digital conversation is increasingly unreliable and ensure their policies, […]
Author: Sean M. Pena

Developers, engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) contractors, and equipment suppliers each play a critical role in completing a BESS project. However, when equipment costs rise, deliveries are delayed, or regulations change, determining who bears the financial consequences can become contentious. Well-drafted project agreements are essential to sound risk allocation. Key Takeaways This article is Part […]
Author: Nicholas Wall

IP infringement occurs when someone uses your intellectual property without your permission or beyond the scope of the permission you granted. Common examples of IP infringement include copying a product’s patented features or using a trademarked logo in a way that is likely to confuse consumers about the source or affiliation of goods or services. […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki

When facing public allegations of wrongdoing, companies should not let the speed of the public conversation dictate the speed of an investigation. An investigation designed to confirm a preferred narrative rather than establish the facts can create serious problems later, particularly if litigation, regulatory scrutiny, or employment claims follow. Key Takeaways When public allegations surface […]
Author: Sean M. Pena
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!