United Felt Company
Volume 56 · 56 F.T.C. 412
Cite this decision
United Felt Company, 56 F.T.C. 412 (1959). Consumer Law Library, https://consumerlawlibrary.org/decisions/v056-0094
Report an error in this record (decision id v056-0094)
Cited by 0 later FTC decisions
Cites
Text (OCR of the scan at left; may contain errors)
In tee Marrer oF UNITED FELT COMPANY, ET AL.
ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE WOOL PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket 7182. Complaint, Apr. 29, 1958—Decision, Oct. 21, 1959 Order requiring a Chicago manufacturer to cease violating the Wool Products Labeling Act by labeling as “70% reprocessed wool, 830% man-made fibers” and as “95% reprocessed wool, 5% other fibers,” rolled battings which in each instance contained substantially less woo] and more pon-woolen fibers than was thus indicated: and by failing to comply in other respects with the labeling provisions of the Act.
Before d/r. William L. Pack, heaving examiner. Mr. William A. Somers for the Commission. Mr. Hymen S. Gratch, of Chicago, Ill.. for respondents. Syllabus 56 F.T.C.
ents’. representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the introduction or manufacture for introduction into commerce, or the offering for sale, sale, transportation, or distribution in commerce, as ‘commerce’ is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939, of wool batting or other ‘wool products,’ as such products are defined in and subject. to the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939, which products contain, purport to contain, or in any way are represented as containing ‘wool,’ ‘reprocessed wool,’ or ‘reused wool,’ do forthwith cease and desist from misbranding such products by:
1. Falsely or deceptively stamping, tagging, labeling or otherwise identifying such products as to the character or amount of the constituent fibers included therein.
2. Failing to affix labels to such products showing each element of information required to be disclosed by Section 4(a)(2) of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939.”
Lt is further ordered. That the initial decision as so modified be, and it hereby is, adopted as the decision of the Commission. It 1s further ordered, That respondents shall, within sixty (60) days after service upon them of this order, file with the Commission a report, in writing, setting forth in detail the manner and form in which they have complied with the order to cease and desist contained in the initial decision as modified.