Monsieur Fourrure, Incorporated

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

IN THE MATTER OF MONSIEl:R FOURRURE, INCORPORATED, ET AL. CONSENT ORDER, ETC. , IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE FUR PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket C-1272. Complaint, Nov. 27, 1967-Decision, Nov. 27, 1967 Consent order requiring an Everett, Wash. , retail furrier to cease falsely advertising its fur products.

COMPLAINT 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 Monsieur Fourrure, Incorporated, a corporation, and John Martin Haugen and Robert A. Kilpatrick, 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 Monsieur Fourrure, Incorporated, is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Washington. Respondents John Martin Haugen and Robert A. Kilpatrick 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. Respondents are retailers of fur products with their offce and principal place of business located at 2421 Hewitt Avenue, Everett Washington.

PAR. 2. Subsequent to the effective date of the Fur Products Labeling Act on August 9, 1952, respondents have been and are now engaged in the introduction into commerce, and in the sale, advertising, and offering for sale in commerce, and in the transportation and distribution in commerce, of fur products; and have 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.

, MONSIEUR FOURRURE, INC. , ET AL. 881 Decision and Order880PAR. 3. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively advertised in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act in that certain advertisements intended to aid, promote and assist, directly or indirectly, in the sale and offering for sale of such fur products were not in accordance with the provisions of Section 5 (a) of the said Act.

Among and included in the aforesaid advertisements but not limited thereto, were advertisements of respondents which appeared in issues of the Seattle Times, a newspaper published in the city of Seatte, State of Washington and having a wide circulation in Washington and in other States of the United States. Among such false and deceptive advertisements, but not limited thereto, were advertisements which failed to show the true animal name of the fur used in any such fur product. PAR. 4. By means of the aforesaid advertisements and others of similar import and meaning not specifically referred to herein, respondents falsely and deceptively advertised fur products in that certain of said fur products were falsely or deceptively identified with respect to the name or designation of the animal or animals that produced the fur from which the said fur products had been manufactured, in violation of Section 5 (a) (5) of the Fur Products Labeling Act.

Among such falsely and deceptively advertised fur products, but not limited thereto, were fur products advertised as "Mink" when the fur contained in such fur product was, in fact Japanese Weasel" an animal formerly set forth in the Fur Products Name Guide as "Japanese Mink."

PAR. 5. 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.

DECISro:; 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 Fur Products Labeling Act; and Decision and Order 72 F.

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 respondents that the law has been violated as alleged in such complaint, and waivers and other provisions as required by the Commission s Rules; and The Commission having thereafter considered the matter and having determined that it had reason to believe that the respondents have violated the said Acts, and that complaint should issue stating its charges in that respect, and having thereupon accepted the executed consent agreement and placed such agreement on the public record for a period of thirty (30) days, now in further conformity with the procedure prescribed in 34 (b) of its Rules, the Commission hereby issues its complaint, makes the following jurisdictional findings, and enters the following order: 1. Respondent Monsieur Fourrure, Incorporated, is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Washington, with its offce and principal place of business located at 2421 Hewitt A venue, Everett Washington.

Respondents John :vartin Haugen and Robert A. Kilpatrick are offcers 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 i8 ordered That Monsieur Fourrure, Incorporated, a corporation, and its offcers, and John Martin Haugen and Robert A. Kilpatrick, individually 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, 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 the 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 " /lful' and "fur product" are defined in the Fur Products Labeling Act, do forthwith cease and desist from falsely or deceptively adver- KANEBO U. , INC., ET AL. 883 880 Complaint tising any fur product through the use of any advertisement, representation, public announcement or notice which is intended to aid promote or assist, directly or indirectly, in the sale, or offering for sale of any fur product, and which:

1. Fails to set forth in words and figures plainly legible al1 the information required to be disclosed by each of the subsections of Section 5 (a) of the Fur Products Labeling Act. 2. Falsely or deceptively identifies any such fur product as to the name or designation of the animal or animals that produced the fur contained in the fur product. 3. Falsely or deceptively identifies any such fur product made of fur from the "Japanese Weasel" formerly set forth in the Fur Products Name Guide as "Japanese Mink" as HMink." 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.