Economy Products Corporation et al.

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

\Tit h the order to cease and desist.

I X THE IA TTEH OF ECONO:IY PRODUCTS CORPm,ATION ET AL.

('0:'SEXT OIWEH) ETC. , IX REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATIO)T OF TI- FEDEIL1\L TlLADE C01'DfISSION ACT Docket 8223. Complaint, Dec. 1960-Decision, May 1961 Consent order requiring Chicago manufacturers to cease misrepresenting the size of their sleeping bags on attached labels and in advertisements which gave as the "cut size, dimensions almost invariably larger than the actual size.

Cm,lPLAIXT Pursuant to the provisions of the Fecleral Trade Commission Act and by virtue of the authority vest.ed in it by said Act, the Federal Tracie Commission, having reason to believe that Economy Products Corporation, a corporation, and I-Iarry ",Vagner, Vernon 2\1. vVagner, and Arnold "'V. Behrstock, individually and as officers of said corporation ! hereinafter referred to ns respondents, have violated (;:'1 :.::-; Ii. jl1 \\ 770 FEDERAL TRADE COM:\HSSION DECISIO Complaint 58 F, the provisions of said Act, and it appearing to the Commission that a proceeding by it in respect thereof would be in the public interest hereby issues its complaint, stating its charges in that respect follows:

P AHAGRAPH 1. Respondent Economy Products Corporation is a corporation organized a.nd existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Illinois, with its offce and principal place of business located at 1215 vVashington Boulevard, in the City of Chicago State of illinois. Said corporation does business under the name of SportJine.

Respondents Harry .Wagner, Yernon M. .Wagner, and Arnold VV. Bchrstock are individuals and offcers of said corporate respondent. They formulate, direct and control the acts and practices of the corporate respondent, including the acts and practices hereinafter set forth. Their address is the same as that of the corporate respondent.

PAR. 2. Respondents arc now, and for some time last past have been, engaged in the manufacture, distribution, sale and advertising, among othet things, of sleeping bags.

P fir. 3. In the course and conduct of their business respondents now cause, and for some time last past have caused, their said products when sold, to be shipped from their place of business in the State of 111i11ois to purchasers thereof located in various other States of the United States nnd maintain and at a11 times mentioned herein have maintained, a substantial course of trade in their said products, in commerce, as "commerce is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act.

PAR. 4. Responclents in connect.ion ,,,ith the sale of their sleeping bags, have engaged in misrepresenting the sizes of various of said bags on tags attached thc1"eto and in advertisements of said bags. Respondents' size descriptions are stated as " cut size whereas the dimensions fono-wlng such descriptions are almost invariably larger than the actual size of the bags in question. The term "cut size, ,,,hen used in the manner as stated above, is confusing and tends to indicate that the size follmying such description is the actual size of the finished product. In truth ar..d in fact this is almost never the case, as the actual size of the finished product is snbstantirl11y smaller t.hnn the size set ont on the tags and as advertised.

PAIL 5. By the aforesair1 pract.ices respOJ)c1ents have placed in the hands of their retailers means and illstrumentalities by and t.through ",-which they mislead the pnbhe as t.o the size of their sleepi ng bags.

ECONOMY PRODUC1S CORPORATION ET AL. 771 769 Decision PAR. 6. In the course and conduct of their business at all times mentioned herein, respondents have been engaged in substantial competition, in commerce, with corporations, firms and individuals in the sale of products of the same general kind and nature as that sold by the respondents.

PAR. 7. The use hy respondents of the aforesaid practice has had and now has, the capacity and tendency to mislead members of the purchasing public into the erroneous and mistaken belief that their sleeping bags are larger than is the fact, and into the purchase thereof because of said erroneous and mistaken heJief. As a consequence thereof, substantial trade in commerce has been, and is being, unfairly diverted to respondents from their competitors and substantial injury has thereby been, and is being, done to competition In commerce.

PAR. 8. The aforesaid acts and practices of respondents, as herein alleged, were, and are, al1 to the prejudice and injury of the public and of respondents' competitors and constituted, and now constitute unfair and clecepti VB acts and practices and unfair methods of competition, in commerce, ,vi thin the intent and meaning of the Federa.l Trade Commission Act.

Mr. Charles W. Connell for the Commission. Altheimer, Gray, Naibu'i' fJ La;wton by 11f1'. Davr:d T7. Kahn Chicago, Ill., for r(' p(mc!(,llts.

IXITBL DECISWX BY BXER E. LIPsco, HEARING EXAlIIIXER The complaint herein was issued on December 21, 1960, charging Respondents '1,ith violation of t.he Federal Trade Commission Act by misrepresenting the sizes of various of their sleeping bags on tags attached thereto ancl in advertisements thereof. and ThercJ.iter, 011 J\Iul'ch 21 , 1961 , Hesponde,nts, their counsel, counsel supporting the complaint herein entered into an Agreement Cont.aining Consent Order To Cease And Desist, which was approved by the Director and Assistant Director of the Commission , on latch 24, 1961, submittedBUTeau of Litigation, and thereafter to the I-Iearing Examiner for consideration. The agreement identifies H.respondent Economy Products Corporation as an Illinois corporation, selling sleeping bags under the name Sportllne, '1,ith its offce and principal place of hllsiness located at 1215 '\VnshingLon Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois, and Respondents I-Iarry 'iYagner, Vernon ?\I. '\VagneL and Arnold '\V. Behrstock as illli\Tiduals and oiIcers of said corporate Respondent practices of the ;;ho formulate, direct and control the acts and 772 FEDERAL TRADE CONIMISSION DECISIONS Decision 58 'l. corporate Respondent, their address being the same as that of the. corporate Re.Tonclc.nt.

Respondents admit all the jurisclic60nal facts alleged in t118 complaint, and agree that the record may be taken as jf findi.ngs of jurisdictional facts had been duly made in accordance with such allegations.

Respondents wai,"e any further procedure before the :Hearing Examiner and the Commission; the mnkiEg of findings of fact a,nel conclusions of la,)): and a11 of HIe rights they luay have to challenge or cont.est the nLlic1ity of the order to cease and desist. entered in accordance with the agreement. An parties agree that the record on which the initial decision and t.he decision of the Commission shan be based sha,ll consist solely of the'. complaint and the agreement; that the order to cease and desist as contained in the agreement: when it shall have become a part of the decision of the Commission, sha.n have the same force and effect as if e,entered after a full hearing and may be altered, modified or set aside in the manner provided for other orders; that the compla.int herein may be used in construing the terms of said order; and that t.he agreement is for settleme.nt purposes only and does not. constitute an admission by RespOllr1ents that they have violated the law Cis 8.1- 1cged in the comp1cint.

After considern r:on of the allegations of the coll"lplaint, Rnd the provisions of the agreement and the proposed order, the Hearing Examiner is of the opinion that such order constitutes a satisfactory disposition of this proceeding. Acconlingly in consonance with the t.terms of the aforesaid agreement, the He:using Examiner accepts thb Agreement Containing Consent Order To Crase And Desist; finds that the Commis ion has jurisdiction oyer the Respondents and over their acts and practices as alleged in the compla.int; Rnd finds that this proceeding is in the publlc interest. Therefore. 1 t o1'dered That the respondents Economy Proclucts C01'poratioll a corporation, and its officers, and Hnrry \Vagnel' , Vernon 'VRgner, and Arnold 'V. Behr::stock, individually and RS offcers of said corporation, and respondents' l'epl'esentatives agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device in connection 'with the offering for sale, sale or distribution of sleeping bags or other merchandise in commerce, ns "commerce ' is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act, do forthwith cease and desist from:

1. Ac1ycrtising, labeling or otherwise representing the " cut size 01' dimensions of materials 112CC1 in their construction, unless such HEN I\:AH FURS CORP. ET AL. 773 769 Complaint Tepresentation is accompanied by a description 01 the finished or actual size, with the latter description being given at least equal prominence;

2. Misrepresenting the size 01 such products on tags, in advertising 01' in any other manner;

3. Furnishing any means or instrumentality to others by and through which they may mislead the public as to any 01 the matters referred to in Paragraphs 1 and 2.

DECISION OF THE CO:i\1:MISSION AND ORDER TO FILE REPORT OF COMPLIANCE Pursuant to Section 3.21 01 the Commission s Rules 01 Practice the initial decision of the hearing examiner shah, on the 16th day of May 1961 , become the decision 01 the Commission; and, accordingly: 1 t is Q1'dered That the above-named respondents shah, within sixty (60) days alter service upon them 01 this order, file with the Commission a report in writing, setting forth in detail the manner and Iorm in which they have complied with the order to cease and desist.