Shelton Hosiery Mills, Inc

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

IN THE MATTER OF SHELTON HOSIERY MILLS, INC., ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF Tile FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE WOOL PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket C-ls0.9. Complaint, Mnr. 24, 96Y-lJec/:sion, Mnr. 24, 1 YOY Consent order requiring a Shelton, Conn, men s hosiery mill to cease misbranding and falsely guaranteeing 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 Shelton Hosiery MiJs. Inc. , a corporation, and Henry J. De Marco, Alexander H. De Marco and Joseph R. De Marco, 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 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 Shelton Hosiery Mills, Inc. , is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Connccticut with its offce and principal place of business located at 549 Howe Street Shelton, Connecticut.

Respondents Henry .J. De Marco, Alexander H. De Marco and Complaint 75 F.

Joseph R. De Marco are offcers of said corporation. They formulate, direct and control the policies, acts and practices of said corporation, and their address is the same as that of the corporate respondent.

Respondents are engaged in the manufacture and sale of men woolen hosiery. They ship and distribute such products to various customers in the United States.

PAR. 2. Respondents, now and for some time last past, 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 Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939, 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 the 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 wool products, namely men s hosiery, which contained substantially different amounts and types of fibers 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 Hules and Regulations promulgated under said Act.

Among such misbranded wool products, but not limited thereto. were wool products, namely men s hosiery. with labels on or affxed thereto, which failed to disclose the percentage of the total fiber weight of the said wool products, exclusive of ornamentation not exceeding 5 per centum of 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. 5. Respondents have furnished a false guaranty that their wool products were not misbranded, when they knew, or had reason to believe, that the said wool products so falsely guaranteed 453 Decision and Order might be introduced, sold, transported, or distributed in commerce in violation of Section 9 of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939. PAR. 6. 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 thereundcr, and constituted, and now constitute, unfair methods of competition and unfair and deceptive acts and practices 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 Texties and Furs proposed to present to the Commission for its consideration and which, if issued by the Commission, would charge respondents with violation of thc 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 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 Shelton Hosiery Mils, Inc. , is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Connecticut, with its offce and principal place of business located at 549 Howe Street, Shelton, Connecticut.

Decision and Order 75 F.

Hespondents Henry J. De Marco, Alexander H. De Marco and Joseph R. De Marco 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 is ordered That respondents Shelton Hosiery Mils, Inc. a corporation, and its offcers, and Henry J. De Marco, Alexander H. De Marco, and Joseph R. De Marco, 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 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:

A. 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 cleal' and conspicuous manner each clement of information required to be disclosed by Section 4(a) (2) of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 19;-\9. B. Furnishing a false guaranty that their wool products are not misbranded under the provisions of the Wool Products Labeling Act, where there is reason to believe that the wool products so guaranteed may be introduced sold, transported, or distributed in commerce. It is further ordered That the respondent corporation shall forthwith distribute a copy of this order to each of its operating divisions.

It is fu,.ther ordered That the respondents herein shall, within sixty (60) days after service upon them of this order, fie with the Commission a report, in writing, setting forth in detail the manner and form in which they have complied with this order. YOUNGSTOWN SPECTRUM CORP., ET AL. 457 Complaint