Stern-Slegman-Prins Company et al.

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

Ix THE ::\L\TTER OF STERX-SLEGjIAX-PRIXS CO:;\fPAXY ET ~'-\.L. COX~EXT ORDER, r.:rc.. IX REG.\IW TO THE ~c\ALLEGED nol\TION OF THE FED- ER.\L TIL\DE CO~DnSSIOX , FT7R PRODlTTS L_\BELING WOOL PROD"lTTS LABELING, AND TEXTILE FIBER PRODUCTS IDEXTIFICA TION ACTS Docket C-1,J,2o'S. Complaint, April 2G, 1968--Decision, April, 1968 C'-I11~ent order requiring a Kansas City, :JIo" clothing manufacturer and retailer to cease misbranding and falsely advertising its fur, \\'001 and textile fiber prod uets.

' J: """ ~ Pursuant to the prm-isions of tb..e Fecler~l Trade Commission Act the Fur Proclncts Labeling Act, the "'\Vool Products Labeling Act of Hnn unci the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act, and b~T yirtne of the authority yested in it by said Acts, the Federal Trade Commission hnying reason to belieyc that Stern-Sl€gman-Prins Company, X orlmy iVoolen8, and('()J' rQl'(ltion, trading under its O\Vll name and as nnbert :\1. SIegman, Ferdinand Stern, Sa nl Sleg:man nnd SteTE'n C. Hi~Tinbothflm, individually and as officers of said corporation, hereinnftfl' referred to as respondents, hnxe yiohtec1 the provisions of saiel pr011lulgateclnnc1er the Flu' Proc1-\ds ,incl the Rules and Regulations nets Ln beling Act, the ,Y 001 Products Labeling ~'-\ ct of 18:30 ancl the Textl1e Fibel' Proc1nct IdentiHcation Act, and it apl'2aring to the ( .: .

STERN-SLEGMA1~-PRINS CO, ET AL. 779 :778 ,Complaint Commission that a proceeding by it in respect thereof ,youIcl be in the public interest, hereby issues its complaint stating its charges in that respect as follo\ys ~RAGHAPH 1. R.respondent Stern-Slegman-Prills Company is a corporn bon organized, existing under and doing husinetis under and virtue of the la-\Ys of the State of i\Iissouri, The aforesaid corporation trades under its own name and as N orkay ,Yoolens, He,sponclents Hobert )1. SIegman, Ferdinand Stern, Saul Slegman and ~teven C. I-liginbotham are officers of the corporate respondent, They formulate, direct and control the acts, practices and policies of the :3aicl corporate respondent including those, hereinafter' set forth, H~'spondents are manufacturers anc1retai1ers of fur products, ,yool proclLlcts and textile fiber products, with their office and principal place of business 10eatec1 at 3122 Gillham Plaza, Kansas City, :Missouri. P\R, 2. Respondents are now, and for some time last past have been en.2.' a~"ecl in the introduction into commerce. and in the manufacture for introduction into commerce, and in the sale, ad \"ertising;, and offe.ring -for selle in commerce, and in the transportation and distribution in soldcommerce, of fur products; and have manufactured for sale, adyerti::ed, offered for sale, transported and distributed fur products ",which h,l\'e 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. PXft. 3, Certain of said fur products were misbranded in that they "'ere not. labeled as required under the provisions of Section 4 (2) of the 1"nr Produds Labeling Act ancl in the manner and form prescribed ~' the Rules and Reg"llbtions prolHnlp:ated tberellnder. limited thereto Among such misbranded fur pl'oclllcts. but. not ,,-,ere -tni' products ,with labels ,which failed: 1. To sho'\y the true animal n:mlc' of the fur used in snell fur prodllct, :2. To show the cO1mlly of origin of the imported furs contained in Sl1rl: fur prodl1ct.

\TI. 4. Certain of said1 fur proc1l1cts\\-ere mishmnded in yiolntion of the, Fur Products Labeling --".ct. in that the~' were not labeled in a.c('()l'(bnee with tl1(1 Rules and RE'zulations promulgated t11PI'el1ncler in t1!;1 t the term. "natm' al" ,yas not l1~ed on hlwl:;: to describe fur p1'O(lllct5 "which were 110t pointed, bleaC'llE'ct dyed. tip- dyed, or otherwi~e artificia lly colored, in violation of HllJe 1P (g) of said Rules and "i1,t 10J" 1 c.:.

\R. ;). Certain of said fur proc1uets were falsely and deeeptiyely aclTC'l'tisrd in yilihhnn of the 1'111' Products Labdjn~ Act in that cerdirectly ortain ndH'rtisE'11lents intcJ)(lrc1 to aiel, promote and itSSlst. 780 FEDERAL TRADE CO1-.:L.\IISSION DECISIONS! (Complaint 73 F.

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. Anlone: and included in the aforesaid advertisements. but not limited thereto, were advertise,ments of respondents which appeared in cataloe:s havin!2.' a wide circulation in :i\lissouri and in other States of the United States.

Among such false and deceptive advertisements, but not limited thereto, were advertisements which failed:

1. To show the true animal name of the fur used in anv such fur product.

2, To show that the fur contained in such products was bleached dyed, or otherwise artific.ially colored, w hen-.such was the fact, 3, To show the country of origin of imported furs contained in any such fur product, PAR, 6. By means of the aforesaid advertisements and others of similar import and meaning not specifically referred to herein, respondents falsely and dec.eptively advertised fur products in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act in that the said fur products were not advertised in accordance with the R.ules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in that the. term ;;natural'~ "as not used to c1esc.ribe fur products ,which ,were not pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed, or otherwise artificially colored, in violation of Rule 19(9) of the said Rules and Regulations.

\R. 7, The aforesaid acts and practices of respondents, as herein alleged, are in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act and Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder and constitute unfair methods of competition and unfair and deceptive acts and practices under the Federal Trade Commission Act.

PAR, 8, R.respondents, now and for some time last past, have manufactured for introduction into commerce, introduced into c.cmmerce sold, transported, distributed, delivered for shipment shipped and oftered for sale in commerce, as "commerce" is defined in the 1,V 001 Products Labeling Act of 1939, wool products as "wool product" is c1efine,d therein, PAR. 9. Certain of said wool products were misbranded by respondents within the intent and meaning of Section 4 (n) (1) of the \V 001 Products Labeling Act of 1939 and the R.ules 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,d therein. , STERN-SLEGMAN-PRINS CO. ET AL, 781 778 IComplaint Jllong such misbranded wool products, but not limited thereto, were wool products stamped, tagged, labeled, or otherwise identified by respondents as "~1ohair Bouele," thereby representing that the said products were composed entirely of ~1ohair wool. In truth and in fact said product contained substantially different fibers and amounts of fibers other than wool.

PAR, 10, Certain of said wool products were misbranded by respondents in that they were not stamped, tagged, labeled, or other wise identified as required under the provisions of Section 4 (a) (:2) of the ,Y 001 Products Labeling Act of 1939 and in the manner and form ns 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 affixed thereto which failed to (1is~ close the percentage of the total fiber weight of the said wool product exc.Iusive of ornamentation not exceeding 5 pel' centum 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 per centum or more; and (5) the aggregate of all ,other fibers.

PAR, 11. Certain of said wool products were misbranded in violation of the "\V 001 Products Labeling Act of 1939, in that they :were not labeled in accordance with the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in the following respects:

1, The respective common generic names of fibers present in the wool products were not used in naming such fibers in required information on stamps, tags, labels or other nleans of identification affixed to such wool products, in violation of Rule S of the aforesaid Rules and Regulations, 2, The term mohair was set forth in lien of the term wool on the stamps, tags, labels or other means of identification affixed to such wool products, \without setting forth the percentage of n10hair in the said '\\001 products, in violation of Rule 19 of the aforesaid Rules and Regulations.

3. Samples, swatches or specimens of wool products used to promote or effect sales of such products in commerce, were not labeled or marked the ,Y 001 to show the information required under Section 4 (a) (2) of Products Labeling Act of 1939 and Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder, in violation of Rule 22 of the aforesaid Act and Rules and Regulations.

782 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION DECISIONS: IComplaint 73 F.

PAR, 12, The acts and practices of the respondents as set forth Paragraphs Nine, Ten and Eleven above were~ and are, in viohtion of the ,Vool Products Labeling A.ct of 1939 and Rules anclRegn1ations promulgated thereunder, and constituted, and now constitute unfair methods of competition andllnfair and de.ceptive acts and pr;l ctices in commerce. within the intent and meaning: of the, Federal Trade ('0111- Inission Act, PAR. 13. Respondents are 110\V, and for some time last pa~t lun-e been engaged in the introduction, c1eliver~' for introduction, manufacture for introduction, sale, advertising and offering for, sale, in eom.merce and in the transportation or causing to be transported in commerce and in the importation into the United States: of textile fiber proclncts; and have sold, offered for sale, advertised. delivered, transported and caused to be transported, textile fiber proclllcts, which have beel!. advertised or offered for sale in commerce: and have sold, offered Tor sale, advertised, delivered, transported and caused to be transporteel after shipment in COE1merce, textile fiber products, either il1 their original state or contained in other textile fiber products; as the terms coElmerce" and ;;textile fiber products'~ are defined in the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act.

\R, 14. Certain of said textile fiber 1Jroducts were misbranded bv respondents ,within the intent and meaning of Section 4 (a) or the Textile, Fiber Products Identification Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder, in that the,y were falsely and deceptively stamped, tagged, labeled, invoieed~ advertised, or other'l'iise identified as to the names or amounts of the constituent fibers contained therein.

Among such misbranded textile fiber products, but not limited thereto, were la.dies' dresses advertised as ;;Silk Iridescent': thereby implying that the said fabric contained silk. In truth and in fact, such fabric contained substantially different fibers and amolU1t of fibers other than silk.

PAR. 15. Certain of sa.icl textile fiber products were further misbranded by respondents in that they were not stamped, tagged, In beled or otherwise identified to show each element of information required to be disclosed by Section 4(b) of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act, and in the manner and form prescribed by the Rules and R.egulations promulgated under said Act, Among such misbranded textile fiber products, but not. limited thereto, were swatches of fabric with labels which failed to disclose the true generic names of the fibers present. STEHN-SLEGMAN-PRINS CO, ET AL, 783 778 Complaint PAR. 16, Certain of said textile fiber products ,were misbranded in violation of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act in that they ere not labeled in accordance with the R.ules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in the following respects: 1, Fiber trademarks "'ere placed on labels ,vithout the generic names of the fibers appearing in immediate conjunction there,with in violation of Rule 17 (a) of the aforesaid Rules and Regulations, 2, Fiber trademarks \'Iere placed on labels without a full and complete fiber content disclosure the first time the tiber trademark appeared on the labels in violation of Rule 17 (b) of the aforesaid Rules and Regulations, 3, The generic name of n fiber was used in nonrequired information on labels affixed to textile fiber products, in such a manner as to be false, deceptive, and misleading as to fiber content. or to indicate directly or indirectly, that such textile fiber products ',:ere composed tot-ally or in part of such fiber when such ",as not the ea:3C, in violation of Rule 17 (cl) of the aforesaid Rules and Regulations. 4. Samples, s,vatehes or ~;pecill1sells of textile fiber products used to promote or effect sales of sneh proc1l1ets in commerce, ""'01'.3 not In belecl or murkecl to show the information required under' Section 4 (b) the Textile F'iber Products IclentificHtioE Act and the Hrdes and Regulations promulgated thereunder, in violation of Rule 21 (fl, ) of the aforesaid R,ules and Regulations.

PAR, 17, Certain of said textile fiber products were falsely and deceptively advertised in that respondents in making disclosures or implications as to the fiber content of such textile fiber pro duets in written advertisements, used to aid, promote and assist, c1direct)y or indirectly, in the sale or offering for sale of said products, failed to set forth the required information as to fiber content as specified in Section -d: (c) of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act. and in the rnflnner and form prescribed by the Rules anel Regulations promulgated under' said Act.

Among the textile fiber products, but not limited thereto, ,were ladies dresses which were falsely and deceptively advertised by means of catalogs distributed by the respondents throughout the United States in that the true generic names of the fibers present in such products were not set forth.

PAR, 18, Bv means of the aforesaid advertisements and others of similar import and meaning not specifically referred to herein ~ respondents falsely and deceptively advertised textile fiber products in violation of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act in that Decision and Order 73 F, T, said textile fiber products were. not advertised in accordance with the Rules and Regulations in the following respects: 1, Fiber trademarks were used in advertising textile fiber products without a full disclosure of the fiber content information required by the said Act, and the R,ules and R,egulations thereunder, in at least one instance in said advel'tisenlents in violation of Rule 41 (a) of the aforesaid Rules and R,egulations, 2, Fiber trademarks ,,-ere used in advertising textile fiber products ,containing more than one fiber and such fiber trademarks did not appear in the required fiber content information in immediate proximity and conjunction with the generic names of the fibers to which they re lated in plainly legible type or lettering of equal.l size and conspicuousness, in violation of Rule 41 (b) of the aforesaid Rules and Regulations, 3, The generic name of a fiber was used in advertising,' textile fiber products, in such a manner as to be false, deceptive, and misleading as to fiber content and to indicate, directly or indirectly, that such textile fiber products were composed wholly or in part of such fiber when such was not the ease, in violation of Rule 41 (d) of the aforesaid Rules and Regulations.

PAR, 19, The acts and practices of the respondents as set forth in Paragraphs Fourteen, Fifteen, Sixteen, Seventeen and Eighteen above were, and are, in violation of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act and the Rules and Regulations thereunder, and constituted, and now constitute unfair methods of competition, and unfair and deceptive acts and practices in commerce under the Federal Trade Comnlission 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 COlllinission for its consideration and which if issued by the. CO1l1mission, would charge respondents with violation of the Federa.I Trade Conlmission Act, the Fur Products Labeling Act, the ,V 001 Products Labeling Act of 1939 and the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act; and The respondents and counsel for the Commission having thereafter executed an agreement containing a consent orde,r, 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 nn admission by , STERN-SLEGMAN-PRINS co. ET AL. 785 778 Decision and Order respondents that the law has been violated as alleged in such coll1plaint and waivers and other provisions as required by the COn1l11ission Rules; and The Commission having thereafter considered the matter and ha ving deterll1ined 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 agreemeilt on the public record for a period of thirty (30) days, now in further conformity with the procedure prescribed in ~ 2,34(b) of its Rules, the Commission hereby issuues its complaint makes the following jurisdictional findings and enters the following order:

1. Respondent Stern-Slegman-Prins Company is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the la \vs of the State of ~iissouri with its office and principal place of business located at 3122 Gillham Plaza, Kansas City, ~iissouri. It trades under its own nanle and as N orkay vVoolens.

Respondents Robert 1'1. Slegman, Ferdinand Stern, Saul SIegman and Steven C. Higinbotham are officers of said corporation and theil~ 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 oJ'dated That respondents Stern-Slegman-Prins Company, a corporation, trading under its own name or as N orkay ",Yoolens, or any other' name or names, and its officers, and Robert :1\1. Slegman Ferdinand Stern, Saul SIegman and Steven C, I-liginbotham, individually and as officers 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 comnlerce, of any fur product; or in connection with the 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 term "commerce fur and "fur product" are defined in the Fur Products Labeling Act, do forthwith cease and desist frolll:

786 FEDERAL TRADE CO:::YIMISSION DECISIONS Decision and Order 73 F, A, ilIisbrancling,,' an v fur l)product b"'\: : 1. Failing to affix a label to such fur product showing in \lords and in figures plainly legible all of the information required to be disc.closed by each of the subsections of Section 4 (:2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act, 2, Failing to set forth the, term "natural" as part of the information required to be disclosed on a label under the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder to describe such fur product which is not. pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed, or other'"\\"ise flrtificially colored, B, Falsely or deceDtiyelv advertising any fur nroduct through 0' ~ O' ~ the use of any ad,-ertisement, representation, public.1.annOUllcernent or llotiee "which is intended to aid, promote or assist, directly or indirectly, in the sale, or offering for sale or any such fur product and \I hieh :

1, Fails to set forth in \words and figures plainly legible f\JI the information required to be disclosed by each of the subsections of Section 5 (a) of the Fur Products Labeling 2, Fails to set forth the term "natural" as part of the l, information required to be disclosed in advertisements under the Fur Products Labeling' Act and the Rules and Regulabons promulgated thereunder to describe such fur product which is not pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed or otherwise artificially colored.

It is fuJ,ther O'i'dated That respondents Stern-SIegman-Prins Company. a corporation, trading under its 0\\'11 name or as :N orkay "\V 001ens. or any other name or nf1.mes, and its officers, and Robert ),1. SIegman, Ferdinand Stern, Saul SIegman and Steven C. Higinbotham incli,-idually and as officers of sflid corporation, and respondents' representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the manufacture for introduction into commerce, the introduction into commerce~ or the ofiering for sale, sale, transportation, distribution, delivery for shipment or shipment in commerce of wool products, as "commerce" and "wool Product" are defined in the \V 001 Products Labeling Act of 1939 , do forthwith cease and desist from misbranding ,...-001 products by: 1. Falsely and deceptively stamping, tagging, labeling, or otherwise identifying such products as to the character or amount the constituent fibers contained therein.

:\..

STERN-SLEGMAN-PRI:\S CO. ET AL, 787 '778 Decision and Order :2, Failing to sec.urely affix to, or place on, each such product a stamp, tag, label, or other means of identification showing in a dear and conspieuous manner each element of information required to be disclosed by Section 4 (a) (2) of the \V 001 Procluets Labeling Ad of 1939, 3, Failing to set forth the respective common generic name of fibers in nfl.111ing such fibers in the required information on stamps bgs, labels, or other means of identification attached to wool Dl'oc1acts...l .,t, Using the term "mohair" in lieu of the term "woo 1" on stamps tags, labels, or other means of identification affixed to wool products, without setting forth the percentage of mohair contained in such wool products, O. Failing to affix labels showing in '\'orcls and figures plainly legible all the information required to be disclosed by Section 4 (a) (2) of the "\Vool Products Labeling Act of 1939, to samples s"iyatches or specimens of wool products used to promote or eilect the snJe of such wool products.

It is fuJ'thel' Oi'del' That respondents Stcrn-SJegl11an-Prins Company ~ a corporation, trading under its 0'1'11 name or as N orkay \V 001ens, or under any other name 01' names, and its officers, and Robert ~I. SIegman, Ferdinand Stern, Saul SIegman and Steven C. I-liginbotham indivichw.lly and as officers of said corporation, and respondents' representfltives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the introduction, delivery for introduction, manufacture for introduction, sale, advertising or offering for sale, in commerce, or the. transportation or causing to be transported, 01' the importation into the United States, of any textile fiber product: or in connection ,with the sa Ie., otIering for sale) advertising, delivery, transportation or causing to be transported, of any textile fiber product ,yhieh has been advertised or offered for sale in commerce: or in connection with the sale, ofrering for sale, advertising, delin' l'Y, transportation, or enusing to be. transported, after shipment in cOlmnerce, of any textile fiber product, whether in its original state 01' cclltflined in other textile fiber products, as the terms "commerce and "textile fiber product~' are defined in the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act, do fort11\with cease and desist from: l\fisbranding any textile fiber product by: 1. Falsely or deceptively stamping, tagging, labeling, invoicing, advertising, or otherwise identifying such product as to the name or amount of constituent fibers contained therein. 788 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION DECISIONs, Decision and Order 73 F, 2. Falsely or deceptively stamping, tagging, labeling, invoicing, advertising, or otherwise identifying such product by representing, either directly or by implication, through the use of the terms " Silk Iridescent " or any other terms that any fibers are present in the said textile fiber product when such is not the case, 3. Failing to affix a label to such a textile fiber prod uct showing each element of information required to be disclosed by Section 4(b) of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act..

4, Using a fiber trademark on a label affixed to such a textile fiber product without the generic name of the fiber appearing on the said label.

5, Using a generic name or fiber trademark on any such label whether required or nonrequired, without making a full and complete fiber content disclosure in accordance with the Textile Fiber Products Identifieation Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder the first time such generic name or fiber trademark appears on the label 6, Using a generic name of a fiber or a fiber trademark on a label affixed to any such textile fiber product in such a nlanner as to be false, deceptive 01' misleading as to fiber content or to indicate, directly or indire,ctly, thn t such textile fiber product is composed wholly or in part of such fiber ,yhen such is not the case, 7. Failing to affix labels to samples, swatches or specinlens of textile fiber products used to promote or effect the sale, of such textile fiber products showing in ,,-ords and figures plainly legible all the information required to be disclo~ed by Section 4 (b) of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act, B, Falsely or deceptively advertising any textile fiber product. by:

1. J\1aking any representation, by disclosure or by implieation, as to the fiber content of any textile fiber product in any written advertisement which is used to aid, promote, or' assist, directly or indirectly, in the sale or offering: for sale of such textile fiber product, unless the same information required to be shown on the stamp, tag, label, or other means ofidentificationnnderSection4(b) (1) and (2) of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act is contained in the same advertisement, except that the percentages of the fibers present in a textile fiber product need not be stated, ROBERT' S DISCOUNT CENTER ET AL, 789 778 (Complaint 2, Using a fiber trademark in advertising such textile fiber product without a full disclosure of the required content information in at least one instance in said ad'Tertisement. 3, Using a fiber trademark in advertising such textile fiber product containing more than one fiber -without such fiber trademark appearing on the required fiber content information in immediate proximity and conjunction with the generic name of the fiber in plainly legible type or lettering of equal size and conspicuousness, 4. Using a generic name or fiber trademark of a fiber in advertising such textile fiber product in such a manner as to be false, deceptive, or misleading as to fiber content or to indicate, directly or indirectly, that such textile fiber product is, composed wholly or in part of such fiber when such is not the ease, 1 tis fn1?thel' oTClel'ed That the respondents herein shall, within sixty (60) days after service upon theln 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.