Roy Weaving Company, Inc.

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

IN THE lVL..TTER OF ROY WEAVING COMPANY, IKC., ET AL.

CONSEKT ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALGED YIOJ-LATION OF THE FE- ER.\L TRADE CO?DIISSION AND THE WOOL PROD'GC' S Li\.ELING ACTS Docket C-746. Complaint, Alay 20, 1964-Deoision, May 20, 1961, Consent order requiring Brooklyn, XY., manufacturers to cease violating the Wool Products Labeling Act by such practices as laheling as "100% all wool", piece goods which contfined a substantial quantity of other fibers, , 672 FEDEI!AL TI!ADE COMMISSION DECISIONS Com plain t 65 F.

and failing to show on labels the registered identification Dumber of the il!lnufacturer and the true generic names of fibers present in certain fabrics. as well as the percentages thereof; and to cease violating the Federal Tr.ade Commission . Act by statements on invoices and shipping memoranda which falsely represented the different fibers and quantities thereof present in certain fabrics.

COl\IPLAINT Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the 1V 001 Products Labeling Act of 1939, and by virtue of the authority vested in it by said Acts, the Federal Trade Commission having reason to believe that Roy 'Weaving Company, Inc., Perth Woolen Company, Inc., and 'Weldon 'Woolens Inc., corporations, and Emanuel Seideman and Bella Seideman, individually and as offcers or said corporations hereinafter referred to as respondents, have viol:ted the provisions of said Acts and the Rules and Regulations promulgated under the 'W 001 Products Labeling Act of 1939 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 as follows:

PARAGUAPH 1. Respondents Roy 'Weaving Company, Inc., Perth Woolen Company, Inc., and Weldon IVoolens Inc., are corporations organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue or the laws of the State of New York with their principal place of business located at 71-07 60th Lane, Brooklyn, New York. Individual respondents, Emanuel Seide-man and Bella Seideman are offcers or said corporations and cooperate in formulating, directing and controlling the acts, policies and practices of the corporate respondents including the acts and practices hereafter referred to. The addresses of the individual respondents are the same as that of the corporate respondents. PAR. 2. Subsequent to the effective date of the vVool Products Labeliug Act of 1939 and more especially since 1963, respondents have manufactured for introduction into commerce, introduced into commerce sole, transportd, distributed, delivered for shipment and offered for sale in commerce as "commerce" is defined in said Act, wnol products as "wool products" are defined therein.

PAR. 3. Certain of said wool products were misbranded by the respondents within the inttmt and meaning of Section '1 (a) (1) of the Wool Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder, in that they were falsely and decptively labeled or tagged with respect to the character and amount of the constituent fiber contained therein.

Among such misbraJlded wool products, but not limited thereto were certain piece goods labeled or tagged by respondents as "100% ROY WEAVING CO. L"\ ET AL. 673 671 Complaint all woo!" whereas in truth and in fact said products contained a subst,mtia! quantity of fibers other than woo!. 'R. 4. Certain of said woo! products were further misbranded by respondents in that they were not stamped, tagged or labeled as required under the provisions of Section 4 (a) (2) of the Woo! Products Labeling Act and in the manner and form as prescribed by the Rules and Regulations promulgated under said Act. Among such misbranded wool products, but not limited thereto were woo! products with labels which failed: 1. To show the name or registered identification number of the manufacturer of the wool product or of a person subject to Section 3 of the W 001 Products Labeling Act with respect to such wool product. 2. To show the true generic names of the fibers present; and 3. To disclose the percentage OT such fihers. PAR. 5. The acts and practices of the respondents as set forth above were, and are, in violation of the IVool Products Labeling Act of 1939 and the Rules and Regubtions promulgated thereunder, and constituted, and now constitute, unfa.ir a.nd deceptive acts and practice and unfair methods of competition in connnerce, within the intent and meaning of the Federal Trade Commission Act. PAR. 6. Respondents are now, and Tor sometilne last prtst, have been engaged in the offering for sale, sale and distribution of products namely fabrics, to manufacturers. The respondents maintain, and at all times mentioned herein have maintained, a substantial course of trade of said products in commerce., as "comnlerce" is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act.

PAR. 7. Respondents in the course and conduct of their business as aforesaid, have made statements on their invoices and shipping memoJ'rmda to their customers misrepresenting the character and amount of the constituent fibers present in such products. Among such misrepresentations, but not limited thereto, were statements representing certain fabrics to be " 30% 10hair 15% 'Vool, 45% Viscose 10% Cotton" whereas in truth and in fact the said fabrics contained substantially different fibers and quantities of fibers than were represented.

PAR. 8. The acts and practices set out in Paragraphs Six and Seven have had, and now have, the t.tendency and capacity to mislead and deceive purchasers OT said fabrics as to the true content thereot and to canee them to misbrand product.s manufactured by t.hem in which said materials are used.

PAR. 9. The acts and pract.iees of the respondents set out in Paragraphs Six and Seven were, and are, all to the prejudice and injury of t.he public and of respondent.s' competitors and constituted, and now , Decision and- Order 65 F.

constitute, unfair and deceptive acts and practices, in conllnerce, within the intent and meaning of the Federal Trade Commission Act. DECISION AXD ORDER The Commission having heretofore determined to issue its complaint charging the respondents named in the caption hereof with violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939, and the respondents having been served with notice of said determination and with a copy of the complaint the Commission intended to issue, together with a proposed form of order; and The respondents and counsel for the Commission having thereafter executed an agreement containing a consent order, an admission by respondents of all the jurisdictional facts sct forth in the complaint to issue herein, a statenlcnt that the signing of said agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by respondents that the law has been violated as set forth in such complaint and waivers and provisions as required by the Commission s rules; and The Commission, having considered the agreement, hereby :lccepts same, issues its c0111plaint in the form contemplated by said agreement makes the following jurisdictional findings, and enters the following order:

1. Respondents Roy 1Veaving Company, Inc., Perth Woolen Company, Inc. Weldon 1Voolens Inc., corporations organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Xew York, wit.h their offce and principal place of business at 71-07 60th Lane, Brooklyn, in the city of l\ ew York, State of New York. Respondents Emanuel Seideman and Bella Seideman are offcers of all of the above corporations and their address is the same as that of said corporations.

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 is ordered That respondents R.oy ",Veaving Company, Inc., Perth Woolen Company, Inc., and 1Veldon Woolens 'Inc. , CDrporations, and their offcers, and Emanuel Seideman and Bella Seidcman, individually and as offcers of said corporations, their agents, representatives 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, distribution or delivery for shipment in commerce, of wool fabrics or other wool prod- PACIFIC MOLASSES CO. ET AL. 675 671 Syllabus nets, as "commerce" and "wool product" are defined in the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939, do forthwith cease and desist from: Misbranding of 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 securely affx to, or place on, each such product a stamp, tag, label or other means of identification showing in a clear and conspicious manner each element of information required to be disclosed by Section 4(a) (2) of the ,Vool Prollucts Labeling Act of 1939.

It is f'1-lrther m'dated That respondents Hoy \Ve,aving Comp:1ny, Inc.., Perth ,Voolen Company, Inc., and ,Veldon ,Voolclls Inc., corpol'ations and their offcers, and Emanuel Seideman and Bella S( itleman individually and as offcers of said corporations, and respondents representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the offering for sale, FOaIe 01' distribution of fabrics or other products, in commerce, as "comnwrce ' is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act, do forthwith cea::e and desist from misrepresenting the dmracter or lmOllnt of c.onstituellt fibers contained in such products on invoices or shipping memoranda applicable thereto, or in any other manner. Itl., fu, ?'thel ordered That the respondents herein shah, ,within ciixty (60) days after service upon them of this order, file with the Commission a report in writhlg setting forth in data 11 the manner and form