J. E. Mamiye Import Company

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

In THe MATTER oF J. E.M. IMPORTS, INC., porne sustiness as J. E. MAMIYE IMPORT COMPANY, ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE TEXTILE FIBER IDENTIFICATION ACTS Docket C-1909. Complaint, Apr. 26, 1971— Decision, Apr. 26, 1971 Consent order requiring a San Francisco, Calif., importer and distributor of textile fiber products, including bedspreads to cease misbranding such textile fiber products.

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 J.E.M. Imports, Inc., a corporation, also doing. business as J. E. Mamiye Import Company, and Jack E. Mamiye, 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 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:

Paracrarn 1. Respondent J.E.M. Imports, Inc. is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of California. The respondent corporation maintains its office principal place of business at, 1122 Howard Street, San Francisco, California.

Respondent Jack KE. Mamiye is an officer of said corporation. He formulates, directs and controls the policies, acts and practices of the corporate respondent including those hereinafter referred to. His address is the same as that of the corporate respondent. Respondents are engaged in the importation and distribution of textile fiber products including but not limited to bedspreads. Par. 2. 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 wr ee a Uae Ue a cae (UE 706 Decision and Order 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. 3. Certain of said textile fiber products were misbranded by respondents within the intent and meaning of Section 4(e) 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, bedspreads, which contained sub- — stantially different amounts and types of fibers than as represented. Par. 4. Certain of said textile fiber. products were 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 textile fiber products with labels which failed to disclose the true percentages of such fibers by weight. Par. 5. 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 anp Orprer 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 Consumer Protection proposed to present to the Commission for its consideration and which, if issued by the Commission, would charge Decision and Order 78 EYV.C.

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, and 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 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 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 J.E.M. Imports, Inc., is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of California. Its office and principal place of business is located at 1122 Howard Street, San Francisco, California. Respondent Jack E. Mamiye 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 said corporation.

Respondents are engaged in the importation and distribution of textile fiber products, namely bed spreads. - 2. The Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction of the subject matter of the proceeding and of the respondents and the proceeding is in the public interest.

ORDER It is ordered, That respondents J.E.M. Imports, Inc., a corporation, also doing business as J. .E. Mamiye Import Company, and its officers, and Jack E. Mamiye, 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, delivery 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 Mesa LEANING ALU DIDLRIBULUS, LUNG. WT AL, (U9 706 Complaint 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 misbranding such 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 the 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 information ' required to be disclosed by Section 4(b) of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act.

It is further ordered, That respondents notify the Commission at least 30 days prior to any proposed change in the corporate respondent such as dissolution, assignment or sale resulting in the emergence of a successor corporation, the creation or dissolution of subsidiaries or any other change in the corporation which may affect compliance obligations arising out of the order. ; It is further ordered, That the respondent corporation shall forthwith distribute a copy of the 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.