Monmouth Merchandising Co., Inc

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

IN THE MATTER OF MONMOUTH MERCHANDISING CO., 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-1600. Complaint, Oct. 30, 196. Decision, Oct. 30, 1969 Consent order requiring a Freehold, N. , manufacturer of saddle and utility blankets 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 of the authority vested in it by said Acts, the Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that Monmouth Merchandising Co., Inc., a corporation, and Nathan Koenig, Willam Kaplan and Irving Kaplan, 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 Monmouth Merchandising Co. , Inc. is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New Jersey with its offce and principal place of business located at 231 Throckmorton Street, Freehold, New Jersey.

Respondents Nathan Koenig, William Kaplan and Irving Kaplan 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 business as manufacturers of sad- Complaint 76 F.

die blankets and utilty blankets. Respondents sell and distribute said blankets to jobbers and retailers in interstate commerce. 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 the 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 L beling 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 saddle blankets, 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 Rules and Regulations promulgated under said Act.

Among such misbranded wool products, but not limited thereto were wool products, namely saddle blankets, with labels on or affixed 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. 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. 6. Respondents are now and for some time last past have been engaged in the offering for sale, sale and distribution of cer- MONMOUTH MERCHANDISING CO. , INC. , ET AL. 479 477 Complaint tain products, namely saddle blankets. 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 State of New Jersey 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. 7. 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.

Among such misrepresentations, but not limited thereto, were statements setting forth the fiber content thereof as "80% Wool 15% Nylon, 5% Other Fibers " whereas, in truth and in fact, the product was not "80% Wool, 15% Nylon, 5% Other Fibers " but contained substantially different fibers and amounts of fibers than represented.

PAR. 8. The acts and practices as set forth in Paragraph Seven have the tendency and capacity to mislead and deceive the purchasers of said products as to the true content thereof. PAR. 9. The aforesaid acts and practices of respondents, as set forth in Paragraph Seven 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 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 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 Decision and Order 76 F.

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 Monmouth Merchandising Co. , Inc. , is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New Jersey, with its offce and principal place of business located at 231 Throckmorton Street Freehold, New Jersey.

Respondents Nathan Koenig, Wiliam Kaplan and Irving Kaplan 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 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 Monmouth Merchandising Co. Inc., a corporation, and its offcers, and Nathan Koenig, Wiliam Kaplan and Irving Kaplan, 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, 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. MONMOUTH MERCHANDISING CO. , INC. , ET AL. 481 473 Decision and Order 2. Failing to securely affx 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.

It is further ordered That respondents Monmouth Merchandising Co., Inc., a corporation, and its offcers, and Nathan Koenig, Wiliam Kaplan and Irving Kaplan, 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 offering for sale, sale, or distribution of saddle blankets or other products, in commerce, as "commerce" is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act, do forthwith cease and desist from misrepresenting the character or amount of the 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 in which they have complied with this order.