Premier Clothing Co., Inc

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

IN THE MATTER OF PREMIER CLOTHING CO. INC., ET AL. CONSENT ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND WOOL PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket C-2899. Complaint, Aug. 31. 1977 Decision, Aug. 31. 1977 This consent order, among other things, requires a New York City clothing manufacturer and distributor to cease misbranding and misrepresenting the wool and constituent fiber content of its products. The firm is also required to advise affected customers that the clothing they purchased was misbranded. Appearances For the Commission: Martin Gorman.

FOT the respondents: Pro se. COMPLAINT Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act as amended, 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 Premier Clothing Co. , Inc. a corporation, and Sidney Kreigler, individually and as an offcer of said corporation. hereinafter sometimes 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 Premier Clothing Co., Inc. is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, with its principal offce and place of business located at 120 Fifth Ave., New York, New York. Respondent Sidney Kreigler is an offcer of the corporate respondent. He formulates, directs, and controls the acts and practices of the corporate respondent including the acts and practices hereinafter set forth. His address is the same as that of the corporate respondent. Respondents are engaged in the importation, sale and distribution of clothing products including but not limited to men s and boys coats.

PAR. 2. Respondents, now and for. some time last past, have imported for introduction into commerce, manufactured for introduction into commerce, introduced into commerce, transported, distri- 160 Complaint buted, delivered for shipment, shipped, offered for sale, and sold 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 Labeling 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 certain men s and boys' coats stamped, tagged, labeled, or otherwise identified by respondents as "100% cashmere " whereas, in truth and in fact, said 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 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 men s and boys' coats with labels on or affxed thereto, which failed to disclose the percentage of the total fiber weight of the said wool products, exclusive of ornamentation not (2)exceeding 5 per centum of said total fiber weight, of (1) wool, 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 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 or affecting commerce, under the Federal Trade Commission Act, as amended. PAR. 6. Respondents are now and for some time last past have been engaged in the manufacture, offering for sale, sale, and distribution of certain products, namely men s and boys' coats. 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 York 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 or affecting commerce, Decision and Order 90 F. as "commerce" is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act, as amended.

PAR. 7. Respondents in the course and conduct of their business have made statements on invoices to their customers, misrepresenting the fiber content of certain oftheir products. Among such misrepresentations, but not limited thereto, were statements setting forth the fiber content thereof as "100% cashmere" whereas, in truth and in fact, said products contained substantiaUy different fibers and amounts of fibers than represented. PAR. 8. The acts and practices 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 the respondents as herein aUeged in Paragraph Seven were, and are, aU to the prejudice and injury of the public, and constituted, and now constitute, unfair and deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce, within the intent and meaning of the Federal Trade Commission Act, as amended.

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 New York Regional Offce 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, as amended, 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 of said agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not consititute 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 sixty (60) days, now in further conformity with the procedure prescribed in Section 2. 34 of its Rules, the 160 Decision and Order Commission hereby issues its complaint, makes the following jurisdictional findings, and enters the following order: 1. Respondent Premier Clothing Co. 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 120 Fifth Ave., New York, New York. Respondent Sidney Kriegler is an offcer 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. 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 Premier Clothing, Co. Inc., a corporation, its successors and assigns, and its officers, and Sidney Kriegler, individually and as an offcer of said corporation, and respondents' representatives, agents, and employees, directly or through any corporation, subsidiary, division, or any other device, in connection with the introduction, or importing for 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.

2. Failing to securely affix 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 Premier Clothing Co. Inc. , a corporation, its successors and assigns, and its officers and Sidney Kriegler, 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 importing, advertising, offering for sale, sale or distribution of men and boys' coats in or affecting commerce, as " commerce" is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act, as amended, do forthwith cease and desist from misrepresenting the character or amount of constituent fibers contained in such products on invoices or shipping memoranda applicable thereto, or in any other manner. It is further ordered. That respondents mail a copy ofthis order by Decision and Order 90 F. registered mail to each of their customers that purchased the wool products which gave rise to this complaint. It is further ordered. That respondents notify the Commission at least thirty (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 individual respondent named herein promptly notify the Commission of each change in business or employment status, which includes discontinuance of his present business or employment and each affiiation with a new business or employment, for ten (10) years following the effective date of this order. Such notice shall include respondent's current business address and a description of the business or employment in which he is engaged, as well as a description of his duties and responsibilities. The expiration of the notice provision of this paragraph shall not affect any other obligations arising under this order. It is further ordered That the respondents herein shall within sixty (60) days after service upon them of this order, fie with the Commission a report, in writing, setting forth in detail the manner and form in which they have complied with this order. 165 Complaint