Hobart Laboratories, Inc

Text (OCR of the scan; may contain errors)

aration offered for the treatment of piles cr hemorrhoids and coming within the classification of drugs as the term “drug” is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act.

The designation used by respondent Hobart Laboratories, Inc., for said preparation, the formula thereor and directions for use are as follows:

Designatioi.—Nuzine.

Formitid.—Phe active ingredients for “Nuzine’ are as follows: Guaiacol—U.§.P., 1.66; Oxyquinoline Sulphate, 0.42; Zine Oxide, 2.50; Glycerine—C.P., 1.66; Lanum (anhyd.), 48.76; Petrolatum, 50.00. Directions —NUZINE does not contain narcofies, thus it may be used as often as needed to relieve pain and discomfort.

1. The affected parts should be cleansed with warm water and soap. . Remove cap and replace with special rectal applicator.

3. Lubricate the nozzle of the tube before inserting it into the rectum, by pressing out a small amount of the NUZINE into the palm of the hand and rotating the applicator nozzle therein. A small amount applied to external hemorrhoids will help to relieve soreness and inflammation. NUZINE should be used after bowel movement and before retiring or as directed by the physician. ; if ointment is difficult to expel, place tube in warm water for a few minutes before application.

Par. 3. Respondent Hobart Laboratories, Inc., causes the said preparation, when sold, to be transported from its place of business located at 900 North Franklin Street, Chicago, Ulinois, to purchasers thereof located in various other States of the United States and in the District of Columbia. Respondent maintains, and at all times mentioned herein has maintained, a course of trade in said preparation in commerce, as “commerce” is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act. The volume of business in such commerce has been and is substantial.

Par. 4. In the course and conduct of its said business, respondent has cisseminated, and caused the dissemination of, certain advertisements ecneerning the said preparation by the United States mails and ] "y various Means in com) merce, as " ‘commerce” is defined in the Federa Trade Commission Act, ine! Finding, | but not hmited to, advertis nts inserted in newspapers,_ magazines and other adv ertising media in various States of the United States, and in the District of Columbia, for the purpose of Inducing ai nd which were likely to induce, directly or indirectly, the purchase aid Pi reparation; and has disseminated, end caused the diss Hono of, ae lvertisements concerning said preparation by various means, including but not limited to the aforesaid media for the purpose of inducing and which were likely to induce, directly or indirectly, the purchase of said preparation in commerce, as “commerce” is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act. oen of a prep-sing,

Decision andi Order 66 E.T.C.

Par. 5. Among and typical of the statements and representations contained in said advertisements disseminated as hereinabove set forth are the following:

NUZINE Rectal Ointment STOPS Itching Torture Acts to SHRINK Painful HEMORRHOID SWELLING Amazing new NUZINE is a special formula that acts to shrink painfully inflamed swollen tissue * * * soothe soreness and pain * * * stop itching * * * gives FAST, comforting relief.

HEMORRHOIDS?

Quick Comfort * * *

NUZINE OINTMENT

e Stops Itching ® Soothes Pain @ Reduces Swelling e Aids Healing

Par. 6. Through the use of said advertisements, and others similar thereto not specifically set out herein, respondent has represented and is now representing, directly or by implication that the use of “Nuzine” will:

1. Reduce or shrink piles;

2, Eliminate all itch due to or ascribed to piles;

8. Relieve all pain attributed to or caused by piles.

Par. 7. In truth and in fact the use of “Nuzine” will not:

1. Reduce or shrink piles;

2, Eliminate all itch due to or ascribed to piles;

8. Relieve all pain attributed to or caused by piles; 4, Afford any relief or have any therapeutic effect upon the condition known as piles or upon any of the symptoms or manifestations thereof in excess of affording temporary relief of minor pain or minor itching associated with piles.

Therefore, the advertisements referred to in Paragraph Five were and are misleading in material respects and constituted and now constitute, “false advertisements” as that term is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act.

Pan. 8. The dissemination by the respondent of the false advertisements, as aforesaid, constituted, and now constitutes, unfair and deceptive acts and practices in commerce, in violation of Sections 5 and 12 of the Federal Trade Commission Act.

Decision AND ORDER The Commission having heretofore determined to issue its complaint charging the respondent named in the caption hereof with violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act, and the respondent 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 respondent and counsel for the Commission having thereafter executed an agreement containing a consent order, an admission by respondent of all the jurisdictional facts set forth in the complaint to issue herein, a statement that the signing of said agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by respondent 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 accepts same, issues its complaint in the form contemplated by said agreement, makes the following jurisdictional findings, and enters the following order:

1. Respondent Hobart Laboratories, Inc., is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Oklahoma, with its office and principal place of business located at 900 North Franklin Street, in the city of Chicago, State of Illinois.

2. The Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this proceeding and of the respondent and the proceeding is in the public interest.

ORDER

lt ts ordered, That respondent Hobart Laboratories, Inc., a corporation, and its officers, and respondent's representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the offering for sale, sale or distribution of “Nuzine,” or any other preparation of substantially similar composition or possessing substantially similar properties, do forthwith cease and desist from directly or indirectly:

1. Disseminating, or causing the dissemination of any advertisement by means of the United States mails or by any means in commerce, as “commerce” is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act, which represents directly or by implication that the use of respondent's preparation will:

(a) Reduce or shrink piles;

(b) Eliminate all itch due to or ascribed to piles; (ce) Relieve all pain attributed to or caused by piles;

(d) Afford any relief or have any therapeutic effect upon the condition known as piles or upon any of the symptoms or manifestations thereof in excess of affording temporary relief of minor pain or minor itching associated with piles.

356-43S—-70.——- 40

Complaint 66 FVT.C.

Disseminating, or causing to be disseminated, by any means, for the purpose of inducing, or which is likely to induce, directly or indirectly, the purchase of respondent’s preparation, in commerce, as “commerce” is defined in the I’ederal Trade Commission Act, any advertisement which contains any of the representations prohibited in Paragraph 1 hereof.

It is further ordered, That the respondent herein shall within sixty

(80) days after service upon it of this order, file with the Commission a report in writing setting forth in detail the manner and form in which it has complied with this order.

Ix vio Marrer or

VICTOR CASUALS, INC., ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE WOOL PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS

Boekvt C-822, Campielit, Aug. 31, 1964—Decision, Aug. 31, 1964 Consent order requiring New York City manufacturers of wool products to cease violating the Wool Products Labeling Act by such practices as labeling skirts as “S5% veprocessed cashmere, 15% nylon’ when they contained substantially different amounts of fibers than thus represented, failing to label certain skirts with the required information, and using the word “cashmere” in jieu of “wool” on labels without setting forth the correct percentage of cashinere.

Complaint

Com mn nission, : oration, and eer of si said corporation aployee of said cor poraave violated the provisulations 3 >vonmulgated £1039, and it appearin by it im respect thereof would i be int the “eblic interest, hereby issues its complaint stating its charges in that respect as follow 8! Paracrary 1. Respondent Victor Casuals, Inc., is a corporation, organized, existing a and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York.

Individual respondent Shirley Bergman is an officer of said corporation, hereinafter referred to as — ndents, a 1 "D447 sions of the said Acts and the 2 e ool E Pr rodnets Eabeling tion. Individual respondent Victor Bergman is an employee of said corporation. They cooperate in fox mulating, directing and controlling the acts, policies and practices of the corporate respondent including the acts and practices hereinafter referred to. Respondents are manufacturers of wool products with their office and principal place of business jocated at 810 Broadway, Brooklyn, New York.

Par. 2. Subsequent to the ilective date of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939, respondents have manufactured for introduction Into commerce, introduced into commerce, sold, transported, distributed, delivered for shipment, shipped and offered tor sale in commerce as “commerce” is Gefined in said Act, wool products as ‘wool product’ is defined therein.

Pan. 8. Certain of said wool products were misoranded by respondents within the intent and meaning of Section 4(a) (1) of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939 and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder, in that they were falsely and deceptiv ely stamped, tagged, labeled or otherwise identified with respect to the character and amount of the constituent fibers contained therein. «Among such misbranded wool products but not limited thereto. were skirts stamped, tagged, labeled or otherwise identified as containing 856 reprocessed cashmere, 18% nylon, whereas in truth and in fact, said skirts contained substantially different amounts of fibers than represented.

Par. 4. Certain of said wool products were furthe " \ isbranded Je] respondents in that they were not stamped, tagged, 1 oeleci or othervise identified as required under the provisions sof Section L(a) (2) of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1959 and in the maz nnel ‘and form as prescribed by the Rules and Regulations promulgated wm under said Act.

-\among such misbranded | wool prod incts, but not himi ted fereton exclusive @ of 'f ornamentation, but not ss oneeeline 4 five per cent ofs said total fiber weight of: (1) woolen a Aber than wool if said percentage br more: (3) the aggre

Par. 5. Certain of tion of the Wool Products labeled in accordance with t th rel creunder, 1 in that the term “cashmere” was vu reed r Yaat MeLULA affixed to wool products without setting forth the correct percentage of the cashmere, in violation of Rule 19 of the Rules and Regulations under the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939.

Par. 6. The acts and practices of the respondents as set forth above were, and are in violation of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939 and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder, and constituted, and now constitute, unfair and deceptive acts and practices and unfair methods of competition in commerce, within the intent and meaning of the Federal Trade Commission Act.

DeEcISION AND 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 set. forth in the complain to issue herein, a statement 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 accepts same, issues its complaint in the form contemplated by said agreement, makes the following jurisdictional findings and enters the following order:

1. Respondent Victor Casuals, Inc., is a corporation, organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York; with its office and principal place of business located at. 810 Broadway, Brooklyn, New York.

Respondent Shirley Bergman is an officer of said corporation and respondent Victor Bergman is an employee of said corporation. Their address is the same as that of said corporation. 2, The Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this proceeding and of the respondents and the proceeding is inthe public interest.

ORDER

It ts ordered, That respondent Victor Casuals, Inc., a corporation and its officers, and Shirley Bergman individually and as an officer of said corporation, and Victor Bergman individually and as an employee of said corporation, and respondents’ 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, distribution or delivery for shipment, or shipment in commerce, of skirts or other wool products, as “commerce” and “wool product” are defined in the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939, do forthwith cease and desist from:

Misbranding such products by:

1. Falsely and deceptively stamping, tagging, labeling or otherwise identifying such products as to the character or amount of constituent fibers contained therein. 2, Failing to securely affix to, or place on, each such product a stamp, tag, label or other means of identification showing in a clear and conspicuous manner each element of information required to be disclosed by Section 4(a) (2) of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939.

3. Using the term “cashmere” in lieu of the word “wool” in setting forth the required fiber content information on labels affixed to wool products without setting forth the correct percentage of the cashmere present.

It is further 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 form in which they have complied with this order. In THe Matrer or