Opinion may be made by placing the karat designation before the designation of “gold electroplate[d].” (8)…

ADVISORY OPINIONS WITH REQUESTS THEREFOR 1053 1052 Opinion may be made by placing the karat designation before the designation of “gold electroplate[d].” (8) Designation of the thickness of the gold electroplate may be ‘made by placing the thickness designation before the designation of “gold electroplate[d].” Designation of thickness may be made in terms of inches only, or in terms of both inches and microns, but not in terms of microns only since the significance of microns is not generally understood by consumers and may tend to mislead. (4) Designation of the weight of the gold electroplate as proposed may not be made, since the Guides for the Pen and Mechanical Pencil Industry (16 C.F.R. § 226) do not provide for such designation, and its use may tend to misléad consumers.

For the foregoing reasons, of the designations you propose, “22 K GOLD ELECTROPLATE,” with “electroplate” designated by the same size letters as “gold,” may be used to identify the pen you describe. The following designations are inappropriate for the indicated

reasons:
(1) 22K GOLD E.P.—abbreviation
(2) 22K E.P. GOLD—abbreviation
(3) 22K G.E.—abbreviation

(4) 2% MICRONS 22 K G.E.—abbreviation ; use of microns only (5) 2.5M 22K G.E.—abbreviation ; use of microns only (6) 2.5 MICRONS 22 K GOLD ELECTROPLATE—use of microns only (7) 1/50 22 K GOLD ELECTROPLATE—use of weight designation (8) 1/50 22 K G.E.—abbreviation ; use of weight designation (9) 1/50 22 K GOLD E.P.—abbreviation; use of weight designation

By direction of the Commission.
Letter of Request
7 Jury 1971
‘HonoRABLE COMMISSIONERS:

This is a request for the Commission to furnish an advisory opinion. We plan to manufacture and market in the United States a ballpen having a gold electroplated casing. Attached is a drawing (HH 7/7/71) of the proposed ballpen.* The casing consists of four metal parts: pushbutton; pocket clip; cap; and barrel. Each of said parts will be electroplated with a gold alloy of 22 karat fineness to a minimum *Not reproduced in this volume. The sketch is available for inspection at the Division ‘of Legal and Public Records, Federal Trade Commission, Washington, D.C. 1054 _ FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION DECISIONS. Request 9 ¥F.T.C.. thickness of at least 2.5 microns, i.e. 100 millionths of an inch. Theplating will be more than 2% (i.e. 1/50) of the weight of the casing. We propose to place on the cap (in addition to our trademark and. the “U.S.A.” country-of-origin mark), one of the following markings : >

22 K GOLD EP.
or
22 K GOLD ELECTROPLATE
or
22 K B.P. GOLD
or
22 K G.E.
or
214 MICRONS 22 K G.E.
or
25 M 22 K GB.
or
2.5 MICRONS 22 K GOLD ELECTROPLATE
or
1/50 22 K GOLD ELECTROPLATE
or
1/50 22 K G.B.
or
1/50 22 K GOLD ELP.

. The markings set forth above appear to be neither expressly approved nor expressly disapproved in the various FTC Trade Practice Rules dealing with gold representations, i.e. the rules for: the Fountain Pen and Mechanical Pencil Industry; the Jewelry Industry ; the Sun Glass Industry ; and the Metallic Watchband Industry. Said various Trade Practice Rules, by setting ‘forth examples, expressly approve the use of abbreviations such as “G.F.” (for Gold Filled), “G.P.” (for Gold Plate), and “R.G.P.” (for Rolled Gold Plate), but do not expressly set forth any examples of suitable analogous abbreviations usable on gold electroplated items. Said Rules expressly permit use of a weight designation and a karat designation for items marked as “rolled gold plate”, “R.G.P.”, “Gold Filled” or “G.F.”; but do not expressly go into the matter of a karat designation for gold electroplated items or the matter of a thickness or weight designation for gold electroplated items. The FTC Guides for the Watch Industry, which are more recent than said Rules, expressly approve using a karat designation or a thickness designation together with the term “Gold Electroplate”. These Guides, however, have different (and greater) thickness requirements for use of the term “Gold Electroplate”. Will you please give us your advisory opinion on the legal permissibility, under Section 5 of the FTC Act, of each of the above-proposed 1052 Opinion markings for the ballpen casing described above. Any further guidance you deem advisable would also be appreciated.

Thank you.
Respectfully submitted,
Howarp M. Herrtor,
Legal Counsel.

Proposed Acquisition of Controlling Stock Interest in Another Life Insurance Company. (File No. 713 7029) ]

Opinion Letier
Srrremeer 21,1972
Dear Mr. Locuner:

This is with further reference to your request for an advisory opin‘jon regarding MONY’s proposed acquisition of North American. The Commission is of the view that before an informed decision could be made in response to your request extensive investigation would ‘be necessary. In this circumstance, MONY’s request for an advisory opinion is inappropriate under Section 1.1(c) of the Commission’s Rules.

_ The foregoing should not be construed as an indication that the Commission is not deeply concerned about the potential for anticompetitive effects attending an acquisition of the size contemplated in your request.

We think it obvious that no conclusive judgment with respect to the legality of the transaction can be rendered by the Commission on the basis of the facts submitted. Whether or not MONY’s acquisition of a controlling interest in North American would be lawful could only be determined after extensive investigation of all relevant factors, including the history, structure and behavior of the industry and markets affected by the acquisition. Questions such as the effects on potential competition and on barriers to entry cannot be determined without conducting a full investigation of a sort which is inappropriate in responding to a request for an advisory opinion. In expressing its opinion, the Commission emphasizes that it does not imply any view as to whether, if the acquisition is consummated, the Commission would issue a complaint. The Commission’s determination in such regard would depend on the outcome of the extensive investigation that would be required; and such investigation would entail an *Because of the volume of material submitted, all of the materials are not published. However they are on the public record and are available for inspection at the Division of ‘Legal and Public Records, Federal Trade Commission, Washington, D.C. . Opinion 7 F.T.C, examination into various relevant competitive factors as they might exist at the time proceedings were instituted.

By direction of the Commission.
Letter of Request
May 27,1971