Annis-Stanton Company

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

IN THE MATTER OF ANNIS-STANTON COMPANY ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER, ETC. , IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, THE FLAMMABLE FABRICS AND THE TEXTILE FIBER PRODUCTS IDENTIFICATION ACTS Docket C-l104. Complaint Sept. 1966-Decision Sept. 1966 Consent order requiring a Los Angeles importer and wholesaler of textie fabrics to cease importing and selling dangerously flammable fabrics, misbranding its textile fiber products, and failing to keep legally required records.

COMPLAINT Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act, the Flammable Fabrics Act and the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act, and by virtue of the authority vested in it by said Acts, the Federal Trade Commission, having reason to be- Jieve that Annis-Stanton Company, a corporation, and David Anisgarten and Alfred Stanton, individual1ly and as offcers of said corporation, hereinafter referred to as respondents, have violated the provisions of said Acts and the Rules and Regulations promulgated under the Flammable Fabrics Act and the Textie Fiber Products Identification 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 as follows:

_ _ Complaint 70 F.

PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent Annis-Stanton Company is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of California with its offce and principal place of business located at 443 South San Pedro Street Los Angeles, California.

Respondents David Anisgarten and AJired Stanton are offcers of the corporate respondent. They formulate, direct and control the acts, practices and policies of the said corporate respondent including those hereinafter set forth. Their offce and principal place of business is the same as that of the aforesaid corporate respondent. The respondents are engaged in the importing and wholesaling of texWe fabrics.

PAR. 2. Respondents, subsequent to July 1 , 1954 , the effective date of the Flammable Fabrics Act, have sold and offered for sale, in commerce; have imported into the United States; and have introduced, delivered for introduction, transported, and caused to be transported, in commerce; and have transported and caused to be transported for the purpose of sale or delivery after sale, in commerce; as "commerce" is defined in the Flammable Fabrics Act, fabric, as that term is defined therein, which fabric was, under Section 4 of the Flammable Fabrics Act, as amended, so highly fiammable as to be dangerous when worn by individuals.

PAR. 3. The aforesaid acts and practices of respondents were and are in violation of the Flammable Fabrics Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder, and as such constitutes unfair methods of competition and unfair and deceptive acts and practices in commerce, within the intent and meaning of the Federal Trade Commission Act.

PAR. 4. Subsequent to the effective date of the TexWe Fiber Products Identification Act on March 3, 1960, respondents have been and are now engaged in the introduction, delivery for introduction, sale, advertising, and offering for sale, in commerce and in the transportation or causing to be transported in commerce, and in the importation into the United States, of textile fiber products; and have sold, offered for sale, advertised, delivered, transported and caused to be transported, textile fiber products, which have been advertised or offered for sale in commerce; and have sold, offered for sale, advertised, delivered transported, and caused to be transported, after shipment in commerce, texWe fiber products either in their original state or contained in other texWe fiber products; as the terms "com- ANNIS-STANTON CO. ET AL. 557 555 Complaint merce" and "textile fiber product" are defined in the TexWe Fiber Products Identification Act.

PAR. 5. Certain of said textile fiber products were misbranded within the intent and meaning of Section 4 (a) of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated therennder, in that they were falsely and deceptively stamped, tagged, labeled, invoiced, advertised, or otherwise identified as to the name or amount of constituent fibers contained therein.

Among such misbranded textile fiber products, but not Jimited thereto, were textile fiber products, namely fabrics, with invoices which contained the designation "Bemsilke " thereby representing that said fabrics were composed of 01'. contained silk whereas in truth and in fact the fiber content of said fabrics was rayon.

PAR. 6. Certain of said texWe fiber products were further misbranded in that they were not stamped, tagged, labeled, or otherwise identified as required under the provisions of Section 4 (b) of the TexWe Fiber Products Identification Act, and in the manner and form as prescribed by the Rules and Regulations promulgated under said Act.

Among such misbranded textile fiber products, but not limited thereto, were textile fiber products with labels which failed: 1. To disclose the true generic names of the fibers present; and 2. To disclose the percentage of such fibers; 3. To disclose the country where imported textile fiber products were processed or manufactured;

4. To Jist the fibers present in order of predominance by weight.

PAR. 7. Respondents in substituting a stamp, tag, label, or other identification pursuant to Section 5 (b) have not kept such records as would show the information set forth on the stamp, tag, label, or other identification that was removed and the name or names of the person or persons from whom such texWe fiber product was received, in violation of Section 6 (b) of the TexWe Fiber Products Identification Act.

PAR. 8. The acts and practices of respondents as set forth above were, and are, in violation of the TexWe Fiber Products Identification Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder and constituted, and now constitute, unfair and deceptive acts and practices and unfair methods of competition, in . .

Decision and Order 70 F.

commerce, within the intent and meaning of the Federal Trade Commission Act.

DECISION AND ORDER The Federal Trade Commission having initiated an investigation of certain acts and practices of the respondents named in the caption hereof, and the respondents having been furnished thereafter with a copy of a draft of complaint which the Bureau of Textiles and Furs proposed to present to the Commission for its consideration and which, if issued by the Commission, would charge respondents with violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act, the Flammable Fabrics Act and the Textie Fiber Products Identification Act; and The respondents and counsel for the Commission having thereafter executed an agreement containing a consent order, an admission by the respondents of all the jurisdictional facts set forth in the aforesaid draft of complaint, a statement that the signing of said agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by the respondents that the law has been violated as alleged in such complaint, and waivers and provisions as required by the Commission s rules; and The Commission, having reason to believe that the respondents have violated the said Acts, and havinrr determined that complaint should issue stating its charges in that respect, hereby issues its complaint, accepts said agreement, makes the following jurisdictional findings, and enters the following order: 1. Respondent Annis-Stanton Company is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the Jaws of the State of California, with its offce and principal place of business located at 443 South San Pedro Street, city of Los Angeles State of California.

Respondents David Anisgarten and Alfred Stanton are offcers of the corporate respondent and their 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 Annis-Stanton Company, a corporation, and its offcers, and David Anisgarten and Alfred Stanton, individually and as offcers of said corporation, and re- ANNIS-STANTON CO. ET AL. 559 555 Decision and Order spondents' representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, do forthwith cease and desist from:

(a) Importing into the United States; or (b) Sellng, offering for sale, introducing, delivering for introduction, transporting, or causing to be transported, in commerce, as "commerce" is defined in the Flammable Fabrics Act; or (c) Transporting or causing to be transported, for the purpose of sale or deli very after sale in commerce, any fabric which, under the provisions of Section 4 of the said Flammable Fabrics Act, as amended, is so highly flammable as to be dangerous when worn by individuals. It is further orde,- That respondents Annis-Stanton Company, a corporation, and its offcers, and David Anisgarten and Alfred Stanton, individual11y and as offcers of said corporation and respondents' representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, do forthwith cease and desist from introducing, delivering for introduction, selling, advertising, or offering for sale, in commerce, or transporting or causing to be transported in commerce, or importing into the United States, any textile fiber product; or selling, offering for sale, advertising, delivering, transporting, or causing to transported, any textie fiber product which has been advertised or offered for sale in commerce; or selling, offering for sale, advertising, delivering, transporting, or causing to be transported after shipment in commerce, any textile fiber product, whether in its original state or contained in other textile fiber products as the terms "commerce" and "textile fiber product" are defined in the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act; 1. Which is falsely or deceptively stamped, tagged, labeled, invoiced, advertised, or otherwise identified as to the name or amount of constituent fibers contained therein. 2. Unless each such product has securely affxed thereto a label showing each element of information required to be disclosed by Section 4 (b) of the Textie Fiber Products Identification Act.

It is fu,.ther ordered That respondents Annis- Stanton Company, a corporation, and its offcers, and David Anisgarten and Alfred Stanton, individual11y and as offcers of said corporation and respondents' representatives, agents and employees, directly Complaint 70 F.

or through any corporate or other device, do forthwith cease and desist from failing to keep such records when substituting a stamp, tag, label, or other identification pursuant to Section 5 (b) as would show the information set forth on the stamp, tag, label, or other identification that was removed, and the name or names of the person or persons from whom such textile fiber product was received.

It is further ordered That the respondents herein shaU, within sixty (60) days after service upon them of this order, file with the Commission a report in writing settng forth in detail the manner and form in which they have complied with this order.