On June 24, 2025, the Federal Trade Commission announced a lawsuit against Mercury Marketing, LLC and several affiliated entities and individuals, alleging deceptive advertising practices targeting individuals seeking substance use disorder ("SUD") treatment. The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, focuses on claims that the defendants misled consumers by impersonating well-known treatment centers in online ads and call center interactions.
Alleged Conduct
According to the FTC's complaint, the defendants used paid search ads to target individuals searching online for specific, well-known SUD treatment facilities. Instead of connecting consumers to the providers for which they searched, the ads allegedly redirected them to call centers operated by the defendants or their partners.
The FTC alleges that, once connected, callers were told they had reached the searched-for treatment center, or were speaking with an independent advisor who could help identify appropriate treatment options. In reality, according to the FTC, the call centers were compensated by certain treatment facilities to steer referrals to those providers, including Malibu Detox, Malibu Recovery Center, and Aliya Health Group.
The defendants named in the complaint include multiple entities and individuals allegedly involved in the advertising and referral scheme.
Laws Violated
The FTC is asserting violations of multiple laws and regulations, including: Section 5 of the FTC Act, which prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices; the Opioid Addiction Recovery Fraud Prevention Act of 2018 (OARFPA), which specifically targets deceptive marketing related to SUD treatment; and the FTC's Impersonation Rule, which prohibits impersonating businesses or government entities in commercial activity.
The Commission is seeking permanent injunctions, civil penalties, and other remedies to prevent further violations.
Key Issues for Advertisers
This action highlights several areas of regulatory risk that advertisers—particularly those operating in the healthcare and treatment space—should keep in mind:
Use of branded search terms: While bidding on a competitor's brand name in a search ad is not per se unlawful, the FTC is clearly focused on whether such ads mislead consumers about the identity or affiliation of the advertiser.
Call routing and transparency: Redirecting consumers to a different provider than the one they searched for, particularly without clear disclosure, may be viewed as deceptive—especially where impersonation is alleged.
Claims of independence or expertise: Presenting a call center or referral service as an independent source of clinical advice can trigger substantiation and disclosure obligations, particularly when financial incentives are involved.
Practical Considerations for Clients
For companies engaged in digital marketing—either directly or through third-party lead generators—this enforcement action underscores the importance of reviewing advertising and referral practices. In particular, companies should:
- Ensure paid search and display ads clearly and accurately represent the advertiser's identity;
- Avoid any scripts or call handling practices that could be construed as impersonating a competitor or misrepresenting affiliation;
- Disclose any financial relationships tied to referrals or treatment recommendations; and
- Require compliance representations and oversight mechanisms in contracts with marketing affiliates or lead generation partners.
We will continue to monitor this case and related FTC enforcement trends in the digital advertising and health services sectors. If you have questions about how this action might affect your advertising or referral practices, please contact a member of our team.
This alert provides general coverage of its subject area. We provide it with the understanding that Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz is not engaged herein in rendering legal advice, and shall not be liable for any damages resulting from any error, inaccuracy, or omission. Our attorneys practice law only in jurisdictions in which they are properly authorized to do so. We do not seek to represent clients in other jurisdictions.
