Groval Knitted Fabrics, Inc.

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

IN THE MATTER OF GROV AL KNITTED FABRICS, IKC., ET AL.

cox SENT ORDER ETC. , 1)/ REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AKD THE WOOL PIWDUC' LABELING ACTS Docket C-117'2. Complaint, Feb. 1967-Decision, Feb. 17, 1967 Consent order requiring a New York City jobber of piece goods which also operates a dyeing and finishing plant in Manchester, N, , to cease misrepresenting the fiber content of its wool products. CO?vlPLAG\"T 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 Groval Knitted Fabrics, Inc., a corporation, and Fred Alcott, individually and as an offcer of said corporation, hereinafter referred to as respondents have violated the provisions of said Acts and the Rules and Regulations promulgated under the Wool 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 stabng its charges in that respect as follows: PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent Groval Knitted Fabrics, Inc. , is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of ;\ew York. Respondent Fred Alcott is an offcer of the corporate respondent. He formulates, directs and controls the acts, practices and policies of the said corporation.

Complaint 71 F.

The respondents are wholesalers and jobbers of piece goods with their offce and principal place of business located at 36 West 37th Street, Kew York, New York. Said respondents also own and operate a dyeing and finishing plant at Manchester, K ew Hampshire.

PAR. 2. Subsequent to the effective 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 for sale, in commerce, as "commerce" is defined in s2.id Act wool products as "wool product" is defined therein. PAR. 3. Certain of said wool products were misbranded by the respondents within the intent and meaning of Section 4 (a) (1) of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939 and 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 fabrics that were stamped, tagged, labeled, or otherwise identified by respondents as containing Cotton and Mohair whereas in truth and fact, such products contained substantially different fibers and amounts of fibers other than as represented. PAR. 4. Certain of said wool products were further misbranded by respondents 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 1939 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, was a wool product with a label on or aftxed thereto, which failed to disclose the percentage of the total fiber weight of the said \vool product, exclusive of ornamentation not exceeding 590 of the said total fiber weight, of (1) wool; (2) reprocessed wool: (3) reused wool; (4) each fiber other than wool, when said percentage by weight of such fiber was 5'7 or more; and (5) the aggregate of all other fibcrs.

PAR. 5. 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 methods of . competition and unfair and deceptive acts and practices in com- GROVAL KNITTED FABRICS , INC. , E1' AL. 181 179 Decision and Order merce, within the intent and meaning of the Federal Trade Commission Act.

DECISION A:-D 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 and the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939; and The respondents and counsel for the Commission having thereafter executed an agreement containing a consent order, an admission by the respondents of a1l 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 having determined that complaint should issue stating its charges in that respect, hereby issues its complaint, accepts said agreement, makes the following j uris dictional findings, and enters the following order: 1. Respondent Groval Knitted Fabrics, 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 36 West 37th Street, New York, New York.

Respondent Fred Alcott is an offcer of said corporation and his 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 in the public interest.

ORDER It is ordered That respondents Groval Knitted Fabrics, Inc. and its offcers, and Fred Alcott, individually and as an offcer 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 introduc- Complaint 71 F.

tion, into commerce, or the offering for sale, sale, transportation distribution, delivery for shipment or shipment, in commerce, of 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 the constituent fibers contained 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 conspicuous manner each element of information required to be disclosed by Section 4 (a) (2) of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939.

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 thc