The American Screening Corp. Lawsuit

American Screening Corporation (also known as American Screening, LLC) became the focus of a high-profile federal lawsuit after the company was accused of widespread deceptive business practices during the COVID-19 pandemic. The legal battle led to millions in court-ordered refunds and a ban on selling protective equipment, setting an important precedent for pandemic-era consumer protection.

American Screening Corp. Lawsuit: Main Allegations and Background

What Sparked the Lawsuit?

At the onset of the COVID-19 crisis in 2020, American Screening sold face masks, hand sanitizer, and other personal protective equipment (PPE) online, promising rapid shipping—even “24–48 hour” delivery—when these products were in critical demand. But thousands of customers nationwide complained that their orders were delayed for weeks or never arrived at all, and that the company failed to communicate or process timely refunds.

• The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) filed suit in August 2020, alleging that American Screening and its executives, Ron and Shawn Kilgarlin, violated the FTC Act’s prohibition on deceptive practices and the federal Mail, Internet, or Telephone Order Merchandise Rule (MITOR).
• MITOR requires sellers to have a reasonable basis for shipping claims and to offer prompt refunds if products cannot be sent within advertised time frames.
• The company also allegedly shipped the wrong items (“SKU swaps”) or misrepresented when items were “in stock” despite lacking inventory records.

How Widespread Was the Problem?

• From March to November 2020, the company advertised quick delivery while shipping times averaged as much as six weeks, not days.
• American Screening received hundreds of consumer complaints daily—often about unshipped or wrongly filled orders and failed refund attempts—without adequately addressing them.
• The Better Business Bureau revoked their accreditation in 2020, and the Louisiana Attorney General launched a parallel state case.

The Legal Battle: Court Findings and Outcomes

FTC’s Lawsuit and Summary Judgment

• The FTC argued American Screening deceptively induced pandemic-stricken consumers to buy products on promises it could not fulfill and that it failed to deliver timely refunds as required by law.
• The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the FTC, finding both Ron and Shawn Kilgarlin personally liable due to their authority over company operations and their knowledge of violations.

Monetary and Injunctive Relief

• In 2023, a federal court ordered American Screening and its owners to pay $14.6 million in consumer refunds. A dedicated fund administered by the FTC will issue compensation, with unclaimed money eventually returned to the defendants.
• The ruling imposed a permanent ban on the Kilgarlins and American Screening from selling PPE or related “protective goods and services” and from misrepresenting shipping times or refund policies in any product sales.

The court deemed their misconduct “egregious,” noting that the company continued its practices even after numerous complaints and official warnings. The rulings emphasized that pandemic conditions and market disruptions were not excuses for disregarding consumer rights.

Appeals and Final Rulings

• American Screening and the Kilgarlins appealed, disputing the size of the penalty and the scope of the sales ban. They argued that the monetary judgment was too high and the ban too broad, plus that some evidence should not have been excluded by the district court.
• In June 2024, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit upheld all main points of the lower court’s decision, confirming the refund order and the permanent injunction. The court noted the relief was properly tailored to address actual consumer harm without imposing punitive damages or overbroad restrictions.

Broader Impact and Lessons from the Lawsuit

What Does This Mean for Businesses and Consumers?

• This case serves as a strong warning to companies against misrepresenting product availability or shipping times—especially during emergencies when consumer vulnerability is high.
• It affirms that even in times of national crisis, standard consumer protection rules (like MITOR) apply and will be vigorously enforced.
• The ruling sets a precedent for the level of oversight courts may impose (including permanent sales bans) in cases of “egregious” pandemic profiteering.

Regulatory and Industry Consequences

• The outcome has prompted stricter scrutiny on e-commerce promises, refund practices, and advertising during high-demand scenarios such as pandemics, natural disasters, or national emergencies.
• State-level enforcement and federal consumer protection will likely intensify whenever businesses exploit market disruption for financial gain.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why did the FTC sue American Screening Corp.?

The FTC sued for deceptive marketing, failure to deliver on shipping promises, and not providing required refunds for undelivered PPE, all in violation of consumer protection laws.

How much was the company forced to pay?

The company and its owners were ordered to pay $14.6 million, dedicated to refunding affected consumers.

Can American Screening still sell medical supplies?

No. The permanent federal injunction bars American Screening and its owners from selling PPE and from misrepresenting shipping or refund practices for any products going forward.

What happens if I bought from American Screening?

If you were affected, you may be eligible for a refund through the FTC’s consumer redress program. Unclaimed funds will revert to the company after disbursement.

Conclusion

The American Screening Corp. lawsuit highlights the crucial role of consumer protection laws and aggressive federal enforcement, especially in times of emergency. The court’s orders ensure compensation for thousands of wronged buyers and signal that businesses cannot capitalize on crisis demand through deception or neglect. As e-commerce thrives, the case remains a key reference point for lawful sales practices before, during, and after any national emergency.