Scheflin-Reich, Inc

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

In the Marrer oF SCHEFLIN-REICH, INC., ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE FUR PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket O-2174, Complaint, March 22, 1972—Decision, March 22, 1972. Consent order requiring a New York City firm buying and selling furs to cease falsely and deceptively invoicing its fur products. Complaint Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Fur Products Labeling Act, and by virture of the authority vested in it by said Acts, the Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that Scheflin-Reich, Inc., a corporation, and Joseph Reich and Murray Scheflin, individually and as officers of said corporation, hereinafter referred to as respondents, have violated the provisions of said Acts and the rules and regulations promulgated under the Fur Products Labeling 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:

ParacraPH 1. Respondent Scheflin-Reich, Inc., is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York.

Respondents Joseph Reich and Murray Scheflin are officers of the corporate respondent. They formulate, direct and control the acts, practices and policies of the said corporate respondent including those hereinafter set forth.

Respondents are fur merchants with their office and principal place of business located at 833 Seventh Avenue, New York, New York, SCHEFLIN-REICH, INC., ET AL. 409 408 Decision and Order who either buy raw skins and have them dressed or buy skins already dressed which are sold to their customers. Par. 2. Respondents are now and for some time last past have been engaged in the introduction into commerce, and in the sale, advertising, and offering for sale in commerce, and in the transportation and distribution in commerce, of fur products; and have sold, advertised, offered for sale, transported and distributed fur products which have been made in whole or in part of furs which have been shipped and received in commerce; and have introduced into commerce, sold, advertised and offered for sale in commerce and transported and distributed in commerce, furs, as the terms “commerce,” “fur” and “fur product” are defined in the Fur Products Labeling Act.

Par. 38. Certain of said fur products or furs were falsely and deceptively invoiced by the respondents in that they were not invoiced as required by Section 5(b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the rules and regulations promulgated under such Act. Among such falsely and deceptively invoiced fur products or furs but not limited thereto, were fur products or furs covered by invoices which failed to disclose that the fur contained in the fur products or furs was bleached, dyed, or otherwise artificially colored, when such was the fact.

Par. 4, Certain of said fur products or furs were falsely and deceptively invoiced in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act in that they were not invoiced in accordance with the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder in that the term “natural” was not used on invoices to describe fur products or furs which were not pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed, or otherwise artifically colored, in violation of Rule 19(g) of said rules and regulations. Par. 5. The aforesaid acts and practices of respondents are in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder and constitute unfair methods of competition and unfair and deceptive acts and practices in commerce under the Federal Trade Commission Act.

DECISION AND ORDER The Commission having heretofore determined to issue its complaint charging the respondents named in the caption hereof with violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Fur Products Labeling Act, and the respondents having been served with notice of said determination and with a copy of the complaint the Commission intended to issue, together with a proposed form of order; and Decision and Order 80 F.T.C.

The respondents, their attorney 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 complaint to issue herein, 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 considered the agreement and having accepted same, and the agreement containing consent order having thereupon been placed on the public record for a period of 30 days, now in further conformity with the procedure prescribed in Section 2.14(b) of its rules, the Commission hereby issues its complaint in the form contemplated by said agreement, makes the following Jurisdictional findings, and enters the following order: 1. Respondent Scheflin-Reich, Inc., is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York.

Respondents Joseph Reich and Murray Scheflin are officers of the corporate respondent. They formulate, direct, and control the acts, practices and policies of the said corporate respondent including those hereinafter set forth.

Respondents are fur merchants with their office and principal place of business located at 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, New York.

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 lt is ordered, That respondents Scheflin-Reich, Inc., a corporation, and its officers, and Joseph Reich and Murray Scheflin, individually and as officers of said corporation, and respondents’ representatives, agents, and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, In connection with the introduction into commerce, or the manufacture for introduction into commerce, or the sale, advertising or offering for sale in commerce, or the transportation or distribution in commerce, of any fur product; or in connection with the manufacture for sale, sale, advertising, offering for sale, transportation or distribution of any fur product which is made in whole or in part of fur which has been shipped and received in commerce; or in connection with the introduction into commerce, or the sale, advertising or offering for sale in commerce, or the transportation or distribution in commerce, of any fur, as the terms “commerce,” SCHEFLIN-REICH, INC., ET AL. All 408 Decision and Order “fur” and “fur product” are defined in the Fur Products Labeling Act, do forthwith cease and desist from falsely and deceptively invoicing such fur or fur product by:

1. Failing to furnish an invoice, as the term “invoice” is defined in the Fur Products Labeling Act, showing in words and figures plainly legible all the information required to be disclosed by each of the subsections of Section 5(b)(1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act.

2. Failing to set forth the term “natural” as part of the information required to be disclosed on any invoice under the Fur Products Labeling Act and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder to describe any fur or fur product which is not pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed, or otherwise artificially colored. .

It is further ordered, That respondents Scheflin-Reich, Ine, a corporation, and its officers, and Joseph Reich and Murray Scheflin, individually and as officers of said corporation, shall forthwith distribute a copy of this order to each of its salesmen and to each of the five customers who received furs which gave rise to this matter.

lt 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 subsidaries 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 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 of their compliance with this order.