Etowah Textiles, Inc

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

IN THE MATTER OF ETOW AH TEXTILES, INC., ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER, ETC. , IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE TEXTILE FIBER PRODUCTS IDENTIFICATION ACTS Docket C-1560. Complaint, July 10, 1969-Decision, July 10, 1969 Consent order requiring a Cartersvile, Ga., manufacturer of carpets and other fabric products to cease misbranding and falsely guaranteeing its textile fiber products and failng to maintain required records. COMPLAINT Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act, and by virtue of the authority vested in it by said Acts, the Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that Etowah Texties, Inc., a corporation, and Jesse C. Akins, individually and as an offcer of said corporation, and Samuel M. Timms, individually and as a former offcer of said corporation, hereinafter referred to as respondents, have violated the provisions of said Acts and the Rules and Regulations promulgated under the Textile Fiber Products Identification 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 Etowah Textiles, Inc., is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Georgia.

Respondent Jesse C. Akins is an offcer of said corporate respondent. He formulates, directs and controls the acts, practices and policies of said corporate respondent. Respondent Samuel M. Timms formerly was an offcer of said corporate respondent and is now on the board of directors. He Complaint 76 F.

formulated, directed and controlled the acts, practices and policies of said corporate respondent.

Respondents are engaged in the manufacture and sale of textile fiber products, including floor coverings, with their offce and principal place of business located on Dallas-Rockmart Highway, Cartersvile, Georgia.

PAR. 2. Respondents are now and for some time last past have been, engaged in the introduction, delivery for introduction, manufacture for introduction, sale, advertising, and offering for sale in commerce, and in the transportation or causing to be transported in commerce, and in the importation into the United States, of textile fiber products; and have sold, offered for sale advertised, delivered, transported and caused to be transported textile fiber products, which have been advertised or offered for sale in commerce; and have sold, offered for sale, advertised, delivered, transported and caused to be transported, after shipment in commerce, textile fiber products, either in their original state or contained in other textile fiber products; as the terms "commerce" and "textie fiber product" are defined in the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act.

PAR. 3. Certain of said textie fiber products were misbranded by respondents within the intent and meaning of Section 4 (a) of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder, in that they were falsely and deceptively stamped, tagged, labeled, invoiced, advertised, or otherwise identified as to the name or amount of constituent fibers contained therein.

Among such misbranded textile fiber products, but not limited thereto, were carpets which were invoiced to show the fiber content as "80% Acrylic, 20% Modacrylic " whereas, in truth and in fact, said product contained substantially different fibers and amounts of fibers.

PAR. 4. Certain of said textile fiber 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 (b) of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act and in the manner and form as prescribed by the Rules and Regulations promulgated under said Act.

Among such misbranded textile fiber products, but not limited thereto, were carpets which failed to disclose the true percentage of fibers present by weight.

ETOW AH TEXTILES, INC. , ET AL.

Complaint PAR. 5. Respondents have failed to maintain proper records showing the fiber content of the textie fiber products manufactured by them, in violation of Section 6 of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act and Rule 39 of the Regulations promulgated thereunder.

PAR. 6. Respondents have furnished their customers with false guaranties that certain of the textile fiber products were not misbranded or falsely invoiced by falsely representing in writing on invoices that respondents have filed a continuing guaranty under the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act with the Federal Trade Commission in violation of Rule 38 (d) of the Rules and Regulations under said Act and Section 10 (b) of such Act. PAR. 7. The acts and practices of respondents as set forth above were, and are, in violation of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act 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, under 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 Textile Fiber Products Identification Act; and The respondents and counsel for the Commission having thereafter executed an agreement containing a consent order, an admission by the respondents of al1 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 ha ving 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 Decision and Order 76 F.

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 Etowah Textiles, Inc. , is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Georgia, with its offce and principal place of business located on Dallas-Rockmart Highway, Cartersvi1e Georgia.

Respondent Jesse C. Akins is an offcer of said corporation and his address is the same as that of said corporation. Respondent Samuel l'1. Timms is a former offcer of said corporation and is now on the Board of Directors 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 aJld of the respondents, and the proceeding is in the public interest.

ORDER It is ordered. That respondents Etowah Textiles, Inc., a corporation, and its offcers, and Jesse C. Akins, individually and as an offcer of said corporation, and Samuel M. Timms, individually and as a former offcer of said corporation, and respondents' representatives, 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 in commerce, or the importation into the United States, of any textile fiber product; or in connection with the sale, offering for sale, advertising, delivery, transportation, or causing to be transported of any textile fiber product which has been advertised or offered for sale in commerce; or in connection with the sale, offering for sale, advertising, delivery, transportation or causing to be transported, after shipment in commerce, of any textile fiber product, whether in its original state or contained in other textile fiber products, as the terms "commerce " and "textile fiber product" are defined in the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act, do forthwith cease and desist from:

A. Misbranding textile fiber products by: 1. Falsely or deceptively stamping, tagging, labeling, invoicing, advertising, or othenvise identifying such ETOWAH TEXTILES, INC. , ET AL.

Decision and Order products as to the name or amount of constituent fibers contained therein.

2. Failing to affx a stamp, tag, label or other means of identification to each such product showing in a clear legible and conspicuous manner each element of information required to be disclosed by Section 4 (b) of the Textie Fiber Products Identification Act. B. Failing to maintain and preserve proper records showing the fiber content of the textie fiber products manufactured by said respondents, as required by Section 6 of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act and Rule 39 of the Regulations promulgated thereunder.

It is further 01'dered That respondents Etowah Textiles, Inc. a corporation, and its offcers, and Jesse C. Akins, individually and as an . offcer of said corporation, and Samuel M. Timms, individually and as a former offcer of said corporation, and respondents' representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, do forthwith cease and desist from furnishing a false guaranty that any textile fiber product is not misbranded or falsely invoiced under the provisions of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act.

It is fw.ther 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 in which they have complied with this order.