Julius B. De Vera doing business as The Philippine Shop

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

In ror MATTer or JULIUS B. DE VERA porne Business AS THE PHILIPPINE SHOP, ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, THE FLAMMABLE FABRICS AND THE TEXTILE FIBER PRODUCTS IDENTIFICATION ACTS Docket C-1729. Complaint, Apr. 16, 1970—Decision, Apr. 16, 1970 Consent order requiring a Carmel, Calif.. importer and retailer of novelty and gift items including mantillas to cease misbranding its textile fiber products and marketing dangerously flammable fabrics. Complaint Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act, the Flammable Fabrics Act, as amended, 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 Julius B. De Vera, individually and doing business as The Philippine Shop and Jossie J. De Vera, individually and as manager of said business, hereinafter referred to as respondents, have violated the provisions of said Acts and the Rules and Regulations promulgated under the Flammable Fabrics Act, as amended, and 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:

Paraerarit 1. Respondent Julius B. De Vera is an individual doing business as the Philippine Shop with his office and principal place of business located at Dolores at Fifth Street, Carmel, California.

Respondent. Jossie J. De Vera is manager of the Philippine Shop and formulates, directs and controls the acts and practices of said ~ business.

Respondents are importers and retailers of novelty and gift items among which are mantillas.

THE PHILIPPINE SHOP, ET AL. 473 472 Complaint.

Par. 2. Respondents are now and for some time last past, have been engaged in the sale and offering for sale, in commerce, a and in the importation into the United States, and have introduced, delivered for introduction, transported and caused to be transported in commerce, and have sold or delivered after sale or shipment in commerce, products, as the terms “commerce” and “product” are defined in the Flammable Fabrics Act, which products failed to conform to an applicable standard or regulation continued in effect, issued or amended under the provisions of the Flammable Fabrics Act, as amended.

Among such products mentioned hereinabove were mantillas. Par. 3. The aforesaid acts and practices of respondents were and are in violation of the Flammable Fabrics Act, as amended, 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. 4. Respondents are now and for some time last past have been engaged in the introduction, delivery 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 “textile fiber product” are defined in the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act.

Par. 5. Certain of said textile 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 the constituent fibers contained therein.

Among such misbranded textile fiber products, but not limited thereto, were textile fiber products with labels which set forth the fiber content as 50 percent Rayon, 50 percent Cotton, whereas, in truth and in fact, said products contained substantially different fibers and amounts of fibers than represented. 474. FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION DECISIONS Decision and Order. TT E.T.C, Par. 6. Certain of said textile fiber products were misbranded by respondents in that they were not stamped, tagged, labeled or otherwise identified to show each element of information required under the provisions of Section 4(b) of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act, and the Rules and Regulations promulgated under said Act.

Among such misbranded textile fiber products, but not limited thereto, were textile fiber products without labels and textile fiber products with labels which failed to show in words and figures plainly legible:

(1) The true generic names of the fibers present in the products; and (2) The percentage of each of such fibers; and (3) The name, or other identification issued and registered by the Commission, of the manufacturer of the product, or one or more persons subject to Section 3 with respect to said products. Par. 7. The acts and practices of the 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, the Flammable Fabrics Act, as amended, 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 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 THE PHILIPPINE SHOP, ET AL. 475 472 Order 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 § 2.34(b) of its Rules, the Commission hereby issues its complaint, makes the following jurisdictional findings, and enters the following order:

1. Respondent Julius B. De Vera is an individual doing business as the Philippine Shop, with his office and principal place of business located at Dolores at Fifth Street, Carmel, California. Respondent Jossie J. De Vera is manager of the Philippine Shop and her address is the same as that of said business. Respondents are importers and retailers of gift and novelty items, among which are mantillas.

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 Julius B. De Vera, individually and doing business as The Philippine Shop or under any other name, and Jossie J. De Vera, individually and as manager of said business, and respondents’ representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, do forthwith cease and desist from selling, offering for sale, in commerce, or importing into the United States, or introducing, delivering for introduction, transporting or causing to be transported in commerce, or selling or delivering after sale or shipment in commerce, any fabric, product or related material as “commerce,” “fabric,” “product” and “related material” are defined in the Flammable Fabrics Act as amended, which fails to conform to an applicable standard or regulation continued in effect, issued or amended under the provisions of the aforesaid Act. Lt is further ordered, That the respondents herein shall, within ten (10) days after service upon them of this order, file with the Commission an interim special report in writing setting forth the respondents’ intention as to compliance with this order. This interim Order; 17 BTC.

special report shall also advise the Commission fully and specifically concerning the identity of the product which gave rise to the complaint, (1) the amount of such product in inventory, (2) any action taken to notify customers of the flammability of such product and the results thereof and (8) any disposition of such product since October 6, 1969. Such report shall further inform the Commission whether respondents have in inventory any of the subject mantillas or any other fabric, product or related material having a plain surface and made of silk, rayon and acetate, nylon and acetate, rayon or cotton or combinations thereof in a weight of two ounces or less per square yard or fabric with a raised fiber surface and made of cotton or rayon or combinations thereof. Respondents will submit samples of any such fabric, product or related material with this report.

It is further ordered. That respondents Julius B. De Vera, individually and doing business as The Philippine Shop or under any other name, and Jossie J. De Vera, individually and as manager of said business, and respondents’ representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the introduction, delivery for introduction, sale, advertising or offering for sale, in commerce, or the transporting 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 otherwise identifying such products as to the name or amount of constituent fibers contained therein.

2. Failing to affix a stamp, tag, label or other means of identification to each such textile fiber product showing in a clear, legible and conspicuous manner each element of in- 472 Complaint formation required to be disclosed by Section 4(b) of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act. Lt is further ordered, That 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.