Julee Manufacturing Corporation et al.

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

Ix Tiff fA'IH OF JULln :lIAKeFACTCRIXG CORPORATImr ET AL.

COX-SENT ORDER, ETC. , IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VTOLAnox OF TIll':: FEDERAL TR.-\DE CO::DIISSWX AC'l' Docket 8221. Complaint, Dec. 1960-Decision, Mav, 1961 Consent order requiring manufacturers at Longmeadow, Mass. , to cease misrepresenting the size of their sleeping bags by stating as " cut size" in catalogs and on attached labels, size descriptions almost invariably larger than the actual size of the bags in question.

rCLER :vAKUFACTURING Corporation ET AL. 797 796 Complaint CO::UPLAIXT Pursuant to the provisions of the Fedpral Trade Commission Act and by virtue of the authority vested in it. by said Act, the Fedeull Trade Commis ion, having reason to believe t.hat. tJulee Manufa,cturing Corporation, a corporation, and .Jnlius I\::aplan and Lee Kaplan, individually and as offcers of sai(l corporation, hereinafter referred to as respondents, have violated the provisions of said Act, and it appearing to the Commission that a proceeding by it in respect thereof \yould be in the public interest, hereby issues its comphtint, stating its charges in that respect as follows: PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent .Julce :Manufacturing Corporation is a corporation, organized, existing and doing lmsiness under and by virtue of the hliVS of the State of :Massachusetts. The address of said corporation is 51 Colony Acres Roftd, Longmeadmv, :Massachusetts.

Respondents .Julius Kaplan and Lce Kaplan 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 have been engaged in the manufacture, distribution, sale and advertising of sleeping bags and other yarious types of outdoor supply equipment.

PAn. 8. In the course and conduct of their business Tcsponc1ents haye cimsed their said products, when sold, to be shipped from their place of business in the State of :J.assachusetts to purchasers thereof located ill 'i1r1011S other states of the -Cnited States and ma.intain and at all times mentioned herein have maint.a.ined lL substantial course of trade in their said products, in commerce, as "commerce is c12Anecl in thQ Federal Trade Commission Act. \TI fl. Hesponclents, in COlllwetion with the sale of their sleeping bags, have engaged in misrepresenting the size of various of said bags in their cattdogues and on labels seven or attached thereto. Hespondents' size descriptions are characterized as " cut size " where- , the sizes follow'. ing s1Jch description are almost invariably larger than the actual size of the bags :in question. The term " cut. size when ll,c;ecl in the manner as alleged above, is confusing and tends to indicate that size following such descrip1ion is the actual size of the fmished product.. In truth and in fact, this is almost never the case, as the. actual size of the finished product is smaller thnn the size 2et out on the labels.

PAR. 5. By the aforesaid practices respondents have placed in the hands of their retailers means and instnJmentn.ljt1es by and 798 FEDERAL TRADE CO:\1J\IISSION DECISIONS Decision 58 F.

through which they mislead the public as to the size of their sleeping bags.

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 UEe by respondents of the aforesaid fa.lse, misleading and deceptive statements, representations and practices has had and now has, the capacity and tendency to mislead members of the purchasing public into the erroneous and mistaken belief that said statements and representations 'were and are true and into the purchase of substantial quantities of respondents' products hy reason of said erroneous and mistaken belief. As a consequence thereof substantial trade in commerce has been and is being unfairly diverted to respondents from their competitors an(l substantifll injury has thereby been and is being clone to competition in commerce. \H. 8. The aforesaid acts and practices of responc1entf), as herejn alleged, \yore and are all to the prejudice and injury of the public and of respondents' competitors and constituted and now constitute unfai:;' and aeceptive acts a, nel practices and unfair methods of competit.ion, 111 commerce, within the intent and meaning of the Federal Trade Commission Act.

JIT. OhaT/eO' W. Oonnell supporting the cOlnpJaint. Respondents pro se.

1;'11J... 1, DECISION BY OHN LmVIS: J1EARlNG EX.\1IINEn The Federal Trade Commission issued its complaint against t.he above-named respondents on December 16 , 1D60 , dmrging them ith the use of unfair and deceptive acts and prac1jces and unfair 1118thods of competit.ion, in commerce, in violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act, by the use of false, deception) anclmjslending statements concerning the size of sleeping bags manufactured and sold by them. After being served with said complaint: respondents appeared and entered into an agreement. dated February 2;1 , 1961 containing a consent order to cease and (lesist purporting to (hspose of alj of this proceeding as to all parties. Said agreement which has been signed by all respondents and by counsel supporting the complaint, and approved by the Director, Associate Director and Assistant Director of the Commission s Bureau of Litigation, has been submitted to the above-named hearing examiner for JULEE :vAXL"FACTURING CORPORATION ET AL. 799 796 Decision his consideratioll\ in accordance with Section 3.2;3 of the Commission s Rules of Practice for Adjudicative Proceedings. Hesponclents, pursuant to the aforesaid agreement, have admitted all the jurisdictional facts alleged in the complaint and agreed that the record may be taken as if findings of jurisdictional facts had been duly made in accordance with such allegations. Said agreement further provides that respondents waive any further procedural steps before the hearing examiner and the Commission the making of findings of fact or conclusions of law and all of the rights they may have to challenge or contest the validity of the order to cease and desist entered in accordance with such agreement. It has been agreed that the order to cease and desist issued in accordance with said agreement shall have the sa.me force and effect as if entered after a full hearing and that the complaint may be llsed in construing the terms of said order. It has also been agreed that the record herein shall consist solely or the complaint and said agreement, and that said agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by respondent that they have violated the law as alleged in the complaint. This proceeding having now come on for final consideration on the complaint and the aforesaid agreement containing consent order, and it appearing that the order provided ror in said agreement covers all or the allegations or the complaint and provides ror an appropriate disposition or this proceeding as to a11 parties, said agreement is hereby accepted and is ordered filed upon this decisioll s becoming the decision or the Commission pursuant to Sections 3.21 and 3.25 or the Commission s Rules or Practice for Adjuclicat.ive Proceedings, and the hearing examiner, accordingly, makes the following jurisdictional findings and order; 1. I-respondent J ulce ianufacturing Corporation is a corporation existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of :VIassachusetts, with its offce and principal place of business located at 51 Colony Acres Road, in the City of Longmeadow State of Massachusetts.

llespondents Julius Kaplan and Lee Kaplan are individuals and offcers of the corporate respondent. They formulate, direct and control the acts and practices or the corporate respondent. Their address is the same as that of the corporate respondent. 2. Thc Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this proceeding and of the repondents hereinabove named. The complaint states a cause of action aga.inst said respondents under the Federal Trade Commission Act, ami this proceeding is in t.he interest of the public. , 800 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION DECISIQI\S Syllabus 58 F.

ORDER It is ordered That respondents Juice J\Ianufacturing Corporation a corporation: and its offcers, and respondents .rulius I(aplan nnd Lee Kaplan, individually and as offcers of said corporation, and respondents ' reprcsentatiyes, agents and employees, directly 01' through any corporate or other device, in connection with the offering for sale, sale or distribution of sleeping bags, or other merchandise, in commerce, as "commerce" is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act, do forthwith C8Rse and desist from: 1. Advertising, labeling, or otherwise representing the " cut size or dimensions of materials used in their construction, unless such representation is accompanied by a description of the finished or actual size, with the latter (lescription being given at least equal prominence;

2. J\fisrepresenting the size of such products on labels or in any other manner;

3. Furnishing any means or instrumentalities to others by and through which they may mis10ad the public as to any of thc matters referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2.

DECISION OF Tile C01\DllSSION ,\XD ORDER TO FILE REPORT Of' CO)IPLIANCE Pursuant to Section 3.21 of the Commission s Hules of Practice the initial decision or the hearing examiner shan on the 17th day of l\lay 1961, become the decision of the Commission; and, accordingly: It is ordered That the respondents herein 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 fonn in