Advisory opinion letter to Mr. Steele: Diamond Rug & Carpet Mills, Inc.

Response to Petition 116 F.T.C.

Re: Diamond Rug & Carpet Mills, Inc. Petition to Quash

or Limit Civil Investigative Demands and for
Alternative Relief. File No. 912-3409.
January 29, 1993
Dear Mr. Steele:

This is to advise you of the Federal Trade Commission’s ruling on the Petition to Quash or Limit Civil Investigative Demands and for Alternative Relief (“Petition”), which you filed on behalf of your client, Diamond Rug & Carpet Mills, Inc. “Diamond” or Petitioner’), in the above-referenced matter. The ruling set forth herein has been made by Commissioner Deborah Owen pursuant to authority delegated under Commission Rule of Practice’ 2.7(d)(4). Pursuant to Rule 2.7(f), within three days after service of this decision, Petitioner may file with the Secretary of the Commission a request for full Commission review. The timely filing of such a request shall not stay the return date in this ruling, unless the Commission otherwise specifies. The Petition is denied in part and granted in part for the reasons stated below.

1. Background On April 23, 1992, the staff of the Federal Trade Commission Dallas Regional Office (“DRO”) informed attorneys representing Diamond that the DRO was conducting a non-public inquiry to determine whether Diamond was violating the Textile Fiber Identification Act (“Textile Act’) and the (Federal Trade Commission Act (“FTC Act”) in its labeling, invoicing, and advertising of carpet fiber content and weight. In a letter of that date to Diamond’s attorneys, the staff of the DRO requested a listing of Diamond’s customers, which showed the name, address, telephone number and