Horowitz & Birnbach, Inc.

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

IN THE MATTER OF HOROWITZ & BIRNBACH, INC., ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER, ETC. , IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE FUR PRODDCTS LABELING ACTS Docket C-1232. Complaint, June 1.967 Decision June, 1967 Consent order requiring a New York City manufacturing furrier to cease misbranding its fur products.

COMPLAIi'T Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Fur Products Labeling Act, and by virtue of the authority vested in it by said Acts, the Federal Trade Commission having reason to believe that Horowitz & Birnbach, Inc. , a corporation, and Kathaniel Birnbach and Harry Birnbach, individually 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 Fur Products Labeling 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: PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent Horowitz & Birnbach, Inc. , is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of K ew York. Respondents Nathaniel Birnbach and Harry Birnbach are officers of the corporate respondent. They formulate, direct and control the policies, acts and practices of said corporate respondent.

Respondents are manufacturers of fur products with their office and principal place of business located at 146 West 29th Street, New York, New Yark.

PAR. 2. Respondents are 1101V, and for some time last past have been, engaged in the introducbon into commerce, and in the manufacture for introduction into commerce, and in the sale advertising, and offering for sale in commerce, and in the trans- HOROWITZ & BIRNBACH , INC. , ET AL. 1325 1324 Decision and Order portation and distribution in commerce, of fur products; and have manufactured for sale, sold, advertised, offered for sale transported and distributed fur products which have been made in whole or in part of furs which have been shipped and received in commerce, as the terms "commerce, fur" and "fur product" are defined in the Fur Products Labeling Act. PAR. 3. Certain of said fur products were misbranded in that they were falsely and deceptively labeled to show that fur contained therein was natural, when in fact such fur was pointed bleacbed, dyed, tip-dyed, or otherwise artificially colored, in violation of Section 4 (l) of the Fur Products Labeling Act. PAR. 4. Certain of said fur products were misbranded in that they were not labeled as required under the provisions of Section 4 (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and in the manner and form prescribed by the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder.

Among such misbranded fur products, but not limited thereto were fur products with labels which failed to disclose that the fur contained in the fur products was bleached, dyed, or otherwise artificially colored, when such was the fact. PAR. 5. Certain of said fur products were misbranded in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act in that they were not labeled in accordance with the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder inasmuch as required item numbers were not set forth on labels, in violation of Rule 40 of said Rules and Regulations.

PAR. 6. The aforesaid acts and practices of respondents, as herein alleged, are in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder and constitute unfair and deceptive acts and practices and unfair methods of competition in commerce under 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 hy the Commission, would charge respondents with violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Fur Products Labeling Act; and The respondents and counsel for the Commission having there- Order 7I F.

after 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 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 jurisdictional findings, and enters the following order: 1. Respondent Horowitz & Birnbacb, Inc. , is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, with its offce and principal place of business located at 146 West 29th Street, New York New York.

Respondents Nathaniel Birnbach and Harry Birnbach are officers of said corporation and 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 in the public interest.

ORDER It is ordered, That respondents Horowitz & Birnbach, Inc. a corporation, and its offcers, and Nathaniel Birnbach and Harry Birnbach, individual1ly and as offcers 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 sale, advertising or offering for sale in commerce, or the transportation or distribution in commerce, of any fur product; or in connection with th€ manufacture for sale, sale, advertising, offering for sale, transportation or distribution, of any fur product which is made in whole or in part of fur which has been shipped and received in commerce, as the terms "commerce fur" and "fur product" are defined in the Fur Products Labeling Act, do forthwith cease and desist from: Misbranding any fur product by:

(a) Representing, directly or by implication, on a label that the fur contained in such fur product is Melman MILLS, INC. , ET AL. 1327 1324 Complaint natural when such fur is pointed, bleached, dyed, tipdyed, or otherwise artificially colored. (b) Failing to affx a label to such fur product showing in words and in figures plainly legible a1l of the information required to be disclosed by each of the subsections of Section 4 (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act.

(c) Failng to set forth on a label the item number or mark assigned to such fur product.

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.