"Steffi" Fashions, Inc

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

IN THE MATTER OF STEFFI" FASHIO;\S, INC., ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER, ETC. , lci REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMYIISSIO AND THE WOOL PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket C-1606. Complaint Od. , 190D-Decision, Oct. 30 1969 Consent order requiring a New York City manufacturer of children s wool garments to cease misbranding its wool products. COMPLAINT PlUSllant 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 " Steff" Fashions Inc. , a corporation, and David G. Paris and Ben Chalk, individually and STEFFI" FASHIONS, INC. , ET AL. 507 506 Complaint 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 "Steff" Fashions, Inc., is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the Jaws of the State of New York.

Individual respondents David G. Paris and Ban Chalk are offcers of said corporation. They formulate, direct and control the acts, practices and policies of the corporate respondent including the acts and practices hereinafter referred to. Respondents are engaged in the manufacture of children s wool products. Theil' offce and principal place of business is located at 520 Eighth Avenue, New York, New York.

PAR. 2. Respondents, now and for S01118 time last past, have in- COll1-troduced into commerce, manufnctnred for introduction into meree, sold, transported, distributed, delivered for shipment shipped and offered for sale. in commel'Ct', as "commerce" is def'ned in said Wool Products Labclinp: Act of 1939 , wool products as Hwool 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 tberennder, 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 \'1001 products namely children s coats, which were stamped tagged, JabeJed, or otherwise identified as containing "80% Reprocessed Wool, 2091 Other Fibers " whereas in truth and in fact, such wool products contained substantially different fibers and amounts of fibers than 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 Rnles and Regnlations promulgated under said Act.

Complaint 76 F.

Among such misbranded wool products, but not limited thereto were wool products, namely children s coats, 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. Certain of said wool products were misbranded in violation of the W 001 Products Labeling Act of 1939 in that they were not stamped, tagged, or otherwise identifled in accordance with the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in the following respects, 1. The respective percentages of fibers contained in the face and in the back of pile fabrics were not set out in such a manner as to give the ratio between the face and the back of such fabrics where an election was made to separately set out the flber content of the face and back of wool products containing pile fabrics, in violation of Rule 26 of the aforesaid Rules and Regnlations. 2. Samples, swatches or specimens of wool products used to promote or effect sales of such wool products in commerce, were not labeled or marked to show the information required under Section 4 (a) (2) of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939 and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder, in violation of Rule 22 of the aforesaid Rules and Regulations. 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.

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 STEFFI" FASHIONS, INC. , ET AL. 509 506 Decision and Order charge respondents with violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Wool Products L beling 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 t.he aforesaid draft of complaint.. a statement that the signing of said agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constit.ute an admission by respondents that the Jaw 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 violat.ed the said 1\ (.t.8, and that complaint should issue stating its charges in that respect, and having thereupon accepted the execut.ed consent agreement and placed such agreement on the public record for a period of thirty (30) days, now in further conformit.y with the procedure prescribed in 9 2.34 (b) of its Rules the Commission hereby issues its complaint, makes the following jurisdictional findings, and enters the following order: 1. Proposed respondent Jl Steff" Fashions, Inc., is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, with its offce and principal place of business located at 520 Eighth Avenue, New York, New York. Proposed respondents David G. Paris and Ben Chalk are offcers of said corporation. They formulate, direct and control the policies, acts and practices of said corporation. Their address is the same as that of said corporation. Proposed respondents are engaged in the manufacture of children s wool products. Sales are made to retail stores located throughout the United States.

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 ordend That respondents "Stem" Fashions, Inc., a corporation, and its offcers, and David G. Paris and Ben Chalk, individnally 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 into \\ 510 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSIO:- DECISIONS Decision and Order 7r; F. commerce, or the manufacture for introduction into commerce, or the offering for sale, sale, transportation, distribution, delivery for shipment or shipment, in c.commerce, of \vool products, as commerce" and " 001 product are defined in the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939 , do forthwith cease and desist from misbranding wool products by:

1. Falsely and deceptively stilmping, tagging, labeling or otherwise identifying sucb products as to the character or amount of tile constituent fibers contained therein. 2. Failing to securely ;:dnx to or place on, each such product a stamp, tag, label, 01' other means of identification showing in a clear and c.onspiClV'1JS mmUH each element of information required to be disc,josocl by Section 4(a) (2) of the Wool Products Labeling Act ()jt939.

3. Failing to set forth respective percentages of fibers contained in the face and of pile fabrics in such a mannpx as t.o give the ratio between t.he face and back of e"ch such fabric where an election is made to separately set. out the fiber content of the face and bilck of wool products containing pile fabrics.

4. Failing to ilffx lilbels or other markings to samples, swatches and specimens of wool products used to promote or effect sales of such wool products in commerce, showing in words and figures plainly legible aH of the information required to be disclosed by each of the subsections of Section 4 (a) (2) of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939. It is furthe1' o1'de?' That the respondent corporation shah forthwith distribute a copy of t.his order to each of its operating divisions.

It is further ordered That the respondents herein shah, 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.