Blauner

Text (OCR of the scan at left; may contain errors)

IN THE MATTER OF BLAUNER' , ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER. gtc., IN HEGAIW TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THJ. FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE FUR PRODUCTS LAnELI G ACTS Docket 6955. Complaint, Nov. 1957--lJecisirJn, May, 1959 Consent order requiring a department store in Philadelphia, Pa. , to cease violating the Fur Products Labeling Act by failing to comply with the labeling and invoicing requirements; and by adverti"ing in newspapers which falsely identified the animals producing certain furs and failed to disclose that certain products contained artiflcial1y colored or cheap fur, compared "orig-inal" prices with " now " prices without designating the time of the former, and used comparative prices and percentage savings claims and represented prices as reduced without maintaining adequate records as a basis for such claims.

11,' . John T. Walke1' for the Commission. 111'. J e1"",e E. Purman of Philadelphia Pa. , for respondents. INITIAL DECISION BY WALTER R. JOHNSON, HEARING EXAMINER In the complaint dated November 25 , 1957 , the respondents are charged with violating the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations made pursuant thereto. On February 18, 1959, the respondents and their attorney entered into an agreement with counsel in support of the complaint for a consent order.

Under the agreement, the respondent admits the jurisdictional facts alleged in the complaint. The parties agree, among other things, that the cease and desist order there set forth may be entered without further notice and have the same force and effect as if entered after a full hearing, and the document includes a waiver by the respondent of all rights to challenge or contest the validity of the order issuing in accordance therewith. The agreement further recites that it is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by the respondent that it has violated the law as alleged in the complaint. The hearing examiner finds that the content of the agreement meets all of the requirements of 93. 25 (b) of the Rules of the Commission.

The agreement contains a recommendation that the complaint be dismissed as to respondent George Gorsen, individually and BLA UNDER' , ET AL. 1737 1736 Order as an employee of said corporation, which recommendation based upon an affdavit attached to and made a part of the agreement wherein it is set forth that said respondent is no long-er an employee of Blauner, a corporation.

The hearing examiner being- of the opinion that the agreement and the proposed order provide an appropriate basis for disposition of this proceeding as to all of the parties, the agreement is hereby accepted and it is ordered that the agreement shall not become a part of the offcial record of the proceeding- unless and until it becomes a part of the decision of the Commission. The following jurisdictional findings are made and the following order issued.

1. The respondent Blauner s is a corporation organized, existing, and doing business under the Jaws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, with its offce and principal place of business located at 9th and Market Streets, Philadelphia, Pa. 2. The Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this proceeding and of the respondents and the proceeding is in the public interest.

ORDER It i8 ordered That respondent Blauner, a corporation, and its offcers, and respondent's representatives, agents, and employees directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the introduction into commerce, or the sale, advertising, or offering for sale, in commerce, or the transportation or distribution, in commerce, of fur products, or in connection with the offering for sale, sale, advertising, transportation or distribution of fur products which have been made in whole or in part of fur which has been shipped and received in commerce, as "commerce fur " and "fur product" are defined in the Fur Products Labeling Act, do forthwith cease and desist from: 1. Misbranding fur products by:

A. Failing to affx labels to fur products showing: (1) The name or names of the animal or animals producing the fur or furs contained in the fur product, as set forth in the Fur Products Name Guide and as prescribed under the Rules and Regulations;

(2) That the fur product contains or is composed of used fur when such is the fact;

(3) That the fur product contains or is composed of bleached dyed, or otherwise artificially colored fur, when such is the fact; 1738 FEDERAL TRADE: COMMISSION DECISIONS Orner 55 F.

(4) That the fur product is composed, in whole or in substantial part, of paws, tails, bel1es, or waste fur, when such is the fact ;

(5) The name or other identification issued and registered by the Commission, of one or more persons who manufactured such fur product for introduction into commerce, introduced it into commerce, sold it in commerce, advertised or offered it for sale in commerce, or transported or distributed it in commerce; (6) The name of the country of origin of any imported furs used in the fur product;

(7) The item number or mark assigned to a fur product. B. Setting forth on labels affxed to fur products: (1) Information required under \;4 (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations thereunder in abbreviated form;

(2) Information required under \;4 (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and Rules and Regulations thereunder, mingled with nonrequired information.

2. Falsely or deceptively invoicing fur products by: A. Failing to furnish invoices to purchasers of fur products showing:

(1) The name or names of the animal or animals producing the fur or furs contained in the fur product, as set forth in the Fur Products Name Guide and as prescribed under the Rules and Regulations;

(2) That the fur product contains or is composed of used fur when such is the fact;

(3) That the fur product contains or is composed of bleached, dyed, or artificially colored fur, when such is the fact; (4) That the fur product is composed, in whole or in substantial part, of paws, tails, bellies, or waste fur, when such is the fact;

(5) The name and address of the person issuing such invoices; (6) The name of the country of origin of any imported furs contained in the fur product.

B. Setting forth on invoices information required under \;5 (b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations thereunder in abbreviated form. 3. Falsely or deceptively advertising fur products through the use of any advertisement, representation, public announcement or notice which is intended to aid, promote or assist, directly or BLAUNER' S, ET AL. 1739 1736 Decision indirectly, in the sale, or offering for sale, of fur products, and which:

A. Fails to disclose:

(1) The name or names of the animal or animals producing the fur or furs contained in the fur product, as set forth in the Fur Products Name Guide, and as prescribed under the Rules and Regulations;

(2) That the fur product contains or is composed of bleached dyed or otherwise artificially colored fur, when such is the fact: (3) That the fur product is composed in whole or in substantial part of paws, tails, bellies or waste fur, when such is the fact.

B. Contains the name or names of any animal or animals other than the name or names of the animal or animals that produced the fur from which the fur product was manufactured. C. Makes use of comparative prices by setting forth an earlier bona fide price of the fur product, unless the designated time or such earlier price is given.

4. Th'Iaking price claims or representations in advertisements respecting comparative prices, percentage savings claims, and rcduced prices of furs or fur products unless respondent maintains adequate records disclosing the facts upon which such claims or representations are based.

It is furthe1" o1"dered That the complaint be, and hereby is dismissed as to George Gorsen, individually and as an employee of said corporation.

DECISIO OF THE COMMISSION AND ORDER TO FILE REPORT OF COYIPLIANCE The Commission having considered the initial decision of the hearing examiner wherein he accepted an agreement containing a consent order to cease and desist executed by the respondent Blauner s and its attorney and counsel in support of the complaint, service of which initial decision was completed on April 1959; and It appearing; that the initial decision may be deficient in that it fails to incorporate the substance of certain pertinent provisions of the agreement of the parties:

It is O?'dered That said initial decision be, and it hereby is amended by inserting between the second and third paragraphs thereof the following paragraph:

Vnder the agreement, the respondent admits the jurisdictional Decision 55 F.

facts alleged in the complaint. The parties agree, among other things, that the cease and desist order there set forth may be entered without further notice and have the same force and effect as if entered after a full hearing, and the document includes a waiver by the respondent of all rights 10 challenge or contest the validity of the order issuing in accordance therewith. The agreement further recites that it is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by the respondent that it has violated the law as alleged in the complaint. It is fU1. ther ordm' That the initial decision as so modified shall, on the 8th day of May, 1959, become the decision of the Commission.

It is further ordered That the respondent Blauner, a corporalion, shall, within sixty (60) days after service upon it of this order, file with the Commission a report, in writing, settng forth in detail the manner and form in which it has complied with Ihe order contained in said initial decision. TURAKSKY & DOVER 1741 Decision