Variety Dresses

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

IN THE MATTER OF VARIETY DRESSES TRADING AS DAN-DEE SPORTSWEAR ET AL.

CONSE:-T ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF 1' FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE WOOL PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket C-1236. Complaint, June 30, 1967-Decision, June 30, 1967 Consent order requiring a New York City partnership to cease misbranding its wool products.

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 Variety Dresses, a partnership, trading as Dan-Dee Sportswear, and Samuel Rankus and Moe Weber, individual1ly and as copartners trading as Variety Dresses, 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 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 stating its charges in that respect as follows: PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent Variety Dresses is a partnership, trading as Dan-Dee Sportswear. Respondents Samuel Rankus and Moe Weber are individuals and copartners trading as Variety Dresses. A1l the respondents have their offce and principal place of business located at 247 West 35th Street, in the city of New York, State of New York.

Respondents are manufacturers of wool products. 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 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) (I) of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939 and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder, in that they were falsely and deceptively stamped Decision and Order 71 F. 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 skirts stamped, tagged, labeled, or otherwise identified as containing 95% wool, 5% nylon " whereas in truth and in fact, said skirts contained substantially different fibers and amounts of fibers than as represented. 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 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 were certain products, namely skirts, with labels on or affxed thereto which failed to disclose the percentage of the total fiber weight of the wool products, exclusive of ornamentation not exceeding 5 per centum of said total fiber weight, of (I) wool; (2) reprocessed wool; (3) reused wool; (4) each fiber other than wool when said percentage by weight of such fiber is 5 per centum or more; and (5) the aggregate of all other fibers. 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 and deceptive acts and practices and unfair methods of competition in 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 and the Wool Products Laheling 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 all the jurisdictional facts set forth in the aforesaid draft of complaint, a statement that the signing of said agreement is for settement purposes only and does not DAN -DEE SPORTSWEAR ET AL. 1521 1519 Order 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 j urisdictional findings, and enters the following order: 1. Respondent Variety Dresses is a partnership, trading Dan-Dee Sportswear. Respondents Samuel Rankus and Moe Weber are individuals and copartners trading as Variety Dresses. Said respondents have their offce and principal place of business located at 247 West 35th Street, in the cit.y of New York, State of New York.

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 respondent Variety Dresses, a partnership, trading as Dan-Dee Sportswear, or any other name and Samuel Rankus and Moe Weber, individually and as copartners tradingas Variety Dresses, 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 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 or 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 correctly Shov'ling 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 the manner and form in which they have complied with this order. Complaint 71 F.