Joseph Galler, Inc.

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

In toe Marrer oF JOSEPH GALLER, INC., ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE WOOL PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket C-904. Complaint, June 7, 1965—Decision, June 7, 1965 Consent order requiring New York City importers of wool products, to cease mislabeling and falsely invoicing certain yarns as “100% mohair,” when such yarns contained substantially less mohair than represented and contained other woolen fibers, and to cease describing certain fibers on labels as mohair which were not entitled to such designation, and omitting required information on labels.

Complaint Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Wool 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 Joseph Galler, Inc., a corporation, and Joseph Galler, individually and as an officer of said corporation, hereinafter referred to as respondents, have violated the provisions of the said Acts and the Rules and Regulations promulgated under the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1989, 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:

Complaint 67 BT.C.

ParacrapH 1. Respondent Joseph Galler, Inc., is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York. Its office and principal place of business is located at 156 Fifth Avenue, New York, New York. Individual respondent Joseph Galler, is an officer of said corporate respondent and formulates, directs and controls the acts, policies and practices of said corporation. His address is the same as that of said corporation.

Respondents are importers of wool products. Par. 2. Subsequent to the effective date of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939, respondents have introduced into commerce, sold, transported, distributed, delivered for shipment and offered for sale in commerce as “commerce” is defined in said Act, wool products as “wool product” is defined therein.

Par. 3. Certain of said wool products were misbranded 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 deceptively 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 certain yarns stamped, tagged or labeled as containing 100% Mohair, whereas in truth and in fact, said yarns contained substantially less Mohair than represented and in addition contained a substantial amount of other woolen fibers. Par. 4. Certain of said wool products were further misbranded in that they were not stamped, tagged, labeled or otherwise identified as required under the provisions of Section 4(a) (2) of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1989 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 certain yarns with labels on or affixed thereto which failed to disclose the percentage of the total fiber weight of the wool product, exclusive of ornamentation not exceeding 5 per centum of said total fiber weight, of (1) woolen fibers; (2) each fiber other than wool if said percentage by weight of such fiber is 5 per centum or more; and (3) the aggregate of all other fibers.

Par. 5. Certain of said wool products were misbranded in violation of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939 in that they were not Jabeled in accordance with the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in that the term “mohair” was used in lieu of the word “wool” in setting forth the required fiber content information JOSEPH GALLER, INC., ET AL. 997 995 Decision and Order on labels affixed to wool products when certain of the fibers so described were not entitled to such designation, in violation of Rule 19 of the aforesaid Rules and Regulations.

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. Par. 7. Respondents are now, and for sometime last past, have been engaged in the offering for sale, sale and distribution of certain products, namely yarn, to retail stores. In the course and conduct of their business, respondents, now cause, and for sometime last past have caused, their said products, when sold, to be shipped from their place of business in the State of New York to purchasers located in various other States of the United States, and maintain, and at all times mentioned herein, have maintained, a substantial course of trade in said products, in commerce, as “commerce” is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act.

Par. 8. Respondents in the course and conduct of their business, as aforesaid, have made statements on invoices and shipping memoranda to their customers misrepresenting the fiber content of certain of their said products.

Among such misrepresentations, but not limited thereto, were statements representing certain yarns to be “100% Mohair,” whereas said yarns contained substantially different fibers and quantities of fibers than represented.

Par. 9. The acts and practices set out in Paragraph Eight have had and now have the tendency and capacity to mislead and deceive the purchasers of said products as to the true content thereof and to cause them to misbrand products sold by them in which said materials were used.

Par. 10. The acts and practices of the respondents set out in Paragraph Eight were, and are, all to the prejudice and injury of the public and of respondents’ competitors and constituted, and now constitute unfair and deceptive acts and practices in commerce, within the intent and meaning of the Federal Trade Commission Act. DECISION 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 Prod- Decision and Order 67 F.T.C.

ucts 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 complaint 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 Joseph Galler, 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 156 Fifth Avenue, New York, New York. Respondent Joseph Galler is an officer of said corporate respondent and his address is the same as that of said corporate respondent. 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 Joseph Galler, Inc., a corporation, and Joseph Galler, individually and as an officer of said corporation, and respondents’ representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, do forthwith cease and desist from introducing into commerce, or offering for sale, selling, transporting, distributing or delivering for shipment in commerce, wool yarn or other wool products, as “commerce” and “wool product” are defined in the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939: 1. Which are falsely or deceptively stamped, tagged, labeled or otherwise identified as to the character or amount of the constituent fibers contained therein.

2. Unless such wool yarn or other wool product has securely affixed thereto or placed thereon a stamp, tag, label or other means of identification correctly showing in a clear and conspicuous manner each element of information required to be THE GRAND UNION CO. 999 995 Complaint ‘disclosed by Section 4(a) (2) of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939.

3. Which has affixed thereto a label which uses the term “mohair” in lieu of the word “wool” in setting forth the required information on labels affixed to wool products unless the fibers described as mohair are entitled to such designation and are present in at least the amount stated. ft ts further ordered, That respondents Joseph Galler, Inc., a corporation, and Joseph Galler, individually and as an officer of said corporation, and respondents’ representatives, agents, and employees directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the offering for sale, sale, or distribution of yarn or any other textile products in commerce, as “commerce” is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act, do forthwith cease and desist from misrepresentating the character or amount of constituent fibers contained in yarn or any other textile products on invoices or shipping memoranda applicable thereto or in any other manner. ft 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 MartTTer oF