O.K. Wool Company, Inc

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

IN THE MATTER OF 0.K. WOOL COMPANY, INC., ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND. THE WOOL PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket C-1546. Complaint, June 16, 1969—Decision, June 16, 1969 Consent order requiring a Worcester, Mass., processor of wool and synthetic fiber yarns to cease misbranding and falsely invoicing 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 Complaint 75 F.T.C, of the authority vested in it by said Acts, the Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe: that O.K. Wool Company Inc., a corporation, and Oscar Kazarnovsky, individually and as an officer 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. 0.K.. Wool Company, Inc., is a corporation organized, existing and doing business: under and by virtue of the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts with its office and principal place of business located at 744 Millbury Street, Worcester, Massachusetts.

- Respondent Oscar Kazarnovsky is .an officer of said corporation. He formulates, directs and controls the policies, acts and practices of said corporation, and his address is the same as that of the corporate respondent.

Respondents are engaged in the business of purchase and sale of wool. and synthetic stock and yarns. They also sort, blend and pick said stock and have commission garnetting and spinning performed by outside commission garnetters and spinners. Respondents bale and ship such products to various dealers and yarn manufacturers throughout 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 bales of stock and yarns, which contained substantially different amounts and types of fibers than as represented.

Par. 4. Certain of said wool products were further misbranded 0.K. WOOL. CO., INC., ET AL. 979 977 Complaint 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 Rules and Regulations. promulgated under said Act.

Among such misbranded wool products, but not limited thereto, were wool products, namely bales of stock and yarns, with labels on or affixed thereto, which failed to disclose the percentage of the total fiber weight ofthe 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 (8) the aggregate of all other fibers:

Par. 5. Certain of said wool products, namely bales of stock and yarns, were misbranded in violation ofthe Wool Products Labeling Act in that they were not labeled in accordance with the Rules and Regulations: promulgated thereunder, in that in disclosing the required information words or terms were abbreviated in violation of Rule 9 of the aforesaid Rules and Regula-. tions.

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. thereunder, 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.

Par. 7. Respondents are now and for some time last past have been engaged in the offering for sale, sale and distribution of certain products, namely bales of fibrous stock and yarns. In the course and conduct of their business as aforesaid, respondents now cause and for some time last past, have caused their said products, when sold, to be shipped from their place of business in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to purchasers located in various other States of the United States, and maintain, and at all times mentioned herein have maintained, a substantial course of trade in said products in commerce, as “commerce” is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act.

Par. 8. Respondents in the course and conduct of their business, as aforesaid, have made statements on invoices to their customers, misrepresenting the fiber content of certain of their products. 980 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION : DECISIONS Decision and Order 75 F.T.C.

Among such misrepresentations, but not limited thereto, were statements setting forth the fiber content thereof as “100% Wool wstd. shet.,” thereby representing the product to be composed entirely of wool of Shetland sheep raised on the Shetland Islands or the contiguous mainland of Scotland, whereas, in truth and in fact, the product was not 100% Shetland, but contained: substantially different fibers.and amounts of fibers than represented. Also among such -misrepresentations, but not limited thereto, were statements setting forth the contents thereof as “100% Wool,” “50% Wool,” “50% Acrylic,” and “95% . Wool, 5% Nylon,” whereas. in truth andin fact, in each instance, the products were not:as represented, but contained: substantially different fibers and amounts: of fibers than represented. Par. 9. The acts and practices as set forth in Paragraph Eight. have the tendency and capacity to mislead and deceive the. purchasers of said products as to the true content thereof. __ Par..10. The aforesaid acts and practices of respondents,.as set forth in Paragraph Eight were and are, all to the prejudice and injury of the public, and constituted,.and now constitute; unfair and. deceptive acts. and practices in commerce, within the intent and meaning of the Federal Trade Commission Act. DECISION AND ORDER The Commission having heretofore determined to issue its complaint charging the respondents named in the caption hereof with violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939, and the respondents having been served with notice of said determination and with a copy of the complaint the Commission intended to issue, together with a proposed form of order; 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 complaint to issue herein, 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 considered the agreement and having accepted same, and the agreement containing consent order having thereupon been placed on the public record for a period of thirty (30) days, now in further conformity with the procedure 0.K. WOOL CO., INC., ET AL. 981 977 Decision and Order prescribed in § 2.34(b) of its Rules, the Commission hereby issues its complaint in the form contemplated by said agreement, makes the following jurisdictional findings, and enters the following order: :

1. Respondent O.K. Wool Company, Inc.; is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, with its office and principal place of business located at 744 Millbury Street, in the city of Worcester, Commonwealth of Massachusetts. ‘Respondent Oscar Kazarnovsky is an officer of said corporation and his 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 O.K. ‘Wool Company, Inc., a corporation, and its officers, and Oscar Kazarnovsky, individually and as an officer 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 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 affix to, or place on, each such product a stamp, tag, label, or other means of identification showing 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. 3. Setting forth information required under Section 4(a) (2) of the Wool Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in abbreviated form on labels affixed to wool products.

It is further ordered, That respondents O.K. Wool Company, Inc., a corporation, and its officers, and Oscar Kazarnovsky, individually and as an officer of said corporation, and respondents’ Syllabus 75 F.T.C.

representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any -corporate-or other device, in connection with the offering: for sale, sale or distribution of bales of fibrous stock and yarns, or other products, in commerce, as “commerce” is defined in. the Federal Trade. Commission Act, do forthwith cease and desist from: .

1. Using the word “Shetland,” or any simulation thereof, either alone or in connection with other words, to designate, describe, or refer to: any product which is not composed entirely of wool of Shetland sheep raised on the Shetland Islands or the contiguous mainland of Scotland: Provided however, That in the case of a product composed ‘in part of wool of the aforesaid Shetland sheep and in part of other fibers or materials, such word may be used as descriptive of the Shetland wool content if there are used in immediate connection therewith, with at least equal conspicuousness, words truthfully describing such other constituent fibers or materials, 2. Misrepresenting the’ character or amount of constituent fibers contained in such products. on invoices or shipping memoranda applicable thereto, or in any other manner. It is further ordered, That the respondent corporation shall forthwith distribute a copy of this Order to each of its operating divisions.

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 of their compliance with this order.