William R. Pearsall

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

IN THE J\4. TTER OF WILLIAM R. PEARSALL, FRANCIS COLUCCI AND AARON SILVERMAN DOING BUSINESS AS BOND SKIVING STORES ORDBR, OPINIOK, ETC., IX REGARD TO THE ALLl GED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE CO 'DIISSIOX ACT Docket 6112. Comp7aint, May, 1954 De.cni()l1 , Nov. , 19.'jJ Or del" requiring a concern engaged in sellng domestic and imported sewing machines from its principal offce in Kew York City and branches in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Georgia, and Florida, to cease branding sewing machines made in Japan or machines of which Japanese heads were a part with the legend ":'\Jade in U. S. A. " and .American names and sellng them with no disclosure of their foreign origin; advertising as '; bait" machines Doycr intended to be sold at the prices published, for the purpose of obtaining leads to prospects; advertising false guarantees of pal'tsactually unobtainable; and misrepresenting the ease of operation of acl,ertised machines.

Before 3fr. F'rank Flier hearing examiner. !lit. l1ichael J. Vitale for the Commission. !lit. Engene 11. DuFlocq, of ?lew York City, for respondents. lXTTL\L DECISION BY FR--IXK nn:n, lil\HIX(; EX.DIINEI1 On July 27, 1953, the Commission, pursuant to the provisions of the :Federal Trade Commission Act, issued and subsequently served its complaint in this processing upon the respondents herein, charging them with the use 01 unfair methods of competition nnd unfair and deceptive acts and practices in commerce in violation of the provisions of said Act. There are t,,"O charges in the complaint: (1) that respondents have sold to the purchasing public sewing machines, the heads of which ate manufactured in and imported from Japan awl that these sewing machine heads have been inadequately marked with the result that purchftsers thereof hn.ye been cleceive(l into believing that the mac.hines were of domest.ic manufacture; and (2) that respondents by extensive advertising of "Very Jow priced e\ying machines have secured the names and addresses 01' customers interested in the purchase of sewing machines, but that respondents on demonstration of the achertisecl machines, have made 110 real I As amended.

BOND SEWING STORES 471 470 Decision effort to sell the machines advertised, have disparaged them, and have attempted to sell, and did sell, different and more expensive machines. luother words, that respondents have engaged in "bait advertising. t\after answer, various postponements and some testimony offered in support of the complaint, hearings were suspended for six months to enable counsel in support of the complaint to secure a,n amendment thereto from the Commission, broadening the complaint to include radio continuities and television broadcasts. Thereafter, hearings continued, and at the close of the evidence in support of the complaint counsel for respondents moved to dismiss same, which motion was denied, and thereafter evidence offered by respondents was received find the case closed on August 16 , 1954-, and testimony and other evidence were duly filed in the offce of the Commission. The proceeding now comes on for final consideration by the Hearing Examiner theretofore duly designated by the Commission, on the complaint the anSTIcr thereto, testilnony and other evidence, proposed findings as to the facts and conclusions presented by counsel. The Hearing Examiner has duly considered such record and finds that this proceeding is in the interest of the public and finds the facts as follows: 1. Respondents .William R. Pearsall, Francis Colucci and Aaron Silverman are, and for four years last past have been, co-partners doing business under the name of Bond Sewing Stores, with their Dffce and principal place of business located at 41-20 Queens Boulevard, Sunnyside, Long Island, New York. As such, they were engaged in the retail sale of both domestic and imported sewing machines and have a number of branches in the states of New Jersey, Pennsylvania, !Iarylalld, Georgia a.nd Florida for that purpose, with a gross annual volume of 1% million, 50 percent of which was sold in ew York State through their various retail stores located therein. Respondents do not import machines, but buy them from those who do.

2. In the conduct of their business, respondents cause, and have caused, their said sewing machines and accessories thereto, when sold to be transported from their place of business in the State of New Yark to purchasers thereof located in various other states of the United States. They maintain, and throughout their partnership existence have ma.intained, a course of trade in said products in commerce among and between the various states of the United States which course of trade was, and has been, substantial. 3. There is no evidence that respondents have at any time sold sewing machine heads imported from Japan without any marking of the place of origin whatsoever, but they have admittedly bought and Decision 51 F.

resold to the purchasing public, sewing machine heads imported from Japan marked in letters of gold decalcomania on the black enamel of the machine head placed on the rear of the vertical arm. These sewing machine heads are all designed for electrical operation, and when a motor is attached thereto, at the only place on the head to which it could be attached, namely on the rear of the vertical arm this decalcomania marking showing the place of origin of the machine head is effectively concealed from even careful inspection, short of removing the motor or of turning the machine to a very awkward and unusual position from the ordinary uscr s standpoint. This actioll would evcntuate only from the desire to see that particular spot, but is entirely unlikely to ensue from ordinary and normal use of the machine, since the user faces the :front of the vertical arm with the sewing mechanism to her left. There is substantial evidence in the record that purchaser-users are never shown this concealed marking and never suspect the foreign origin of their purchase until it is called to their attention long after purchase and use by someone familiar with these imported machine heads. The finding is that such marking is, for all practical purposes and to the ordinary user or purchaser, complctcly and effectively concealed. 4. Other sewing machine heads imported from Japan and purchased by respondents for resale had on the front of the vertical arm in some instances, a gold metal plaque, hexagonal, oval or round in shape, about 1% inchcs, vertically and 1 inch horizontally in gold or brass finish bearing the legend "Deluxe" in raised 1h inch letters and below that "Deluxe Family Scwing :\Iachine" in raised letters approximately Vs inch in length, and below that the word "Japan approximat.ely 116 inch in length.

5. Others of these imported,d machine heads, sold by respondents have a similar gold metal plaque rivcted to the front of the vertical arm, but bearing the name "Boyal" in the center thereof in raised letters approximately 71G inch in height, above which in smaller raised letters appears '1953" Series " and below which, in still smaner raised letters about 116 inch in height, appear "Made in Japan. Still others have the same plaques in S1ZC and color, but bearing the word Simplex" instead of "R.royal," the words "\Vashington, D. C, " in. stead of " 1953 Series " and the words ":Made in Japan" in the same relative position as the "Royal" plaque above-described, the legends being of the same relative size and shape. 6. All of these medallions are in bright gold color, in small raised letters only of the same color, with no background coloring to em. phasize the raised letters so that the words "Japan" or "Made in BOND SEWING STORES 473 470 Decision J apan" are not distinct and are diffcult to read at a distance greater than oue foot or so, unemphasized and distinguishable only by careful inspectiou. There is substantial evidence in the record that users and purchasers either did not see, or seeing did not comprehend such marking.

7. Other machines imported from Japan and purchased by respondents for resale were marked with a small gun metal plaque approximately % inch in height and a 1 inch to 1'h inch in width at the foot of the front of vertical arm, bearing the legend "Made in Occupied Japan. " The gun metal coloring of this plaque, attached by rivets as it is, to the black japanned fu1ish of the machine head leaves it unemphasized and diffcult to read the letters themselves at a distance of more than a foot or so. There is also substantial evidence in the record that users and purchasers either did not see this legend, or if they saw it did not make out thc lcttering thereon. 8. .When these markings are taken with the additional facts that the motors attached to these much ine heads an bore the legend "Made in U. S. " 01' "Made in the United States" marked on the top of such motor which labels are plain and conspicuous when the machine is viewed from above and that respondents ' circulars and its extensive advertising in ne-nspapers, by radio and by television, nowhere men tions the place of manufacture of the machine, or the fact that it was imported, and that these machines were ali branded ''with American names, such a,s "l\fargaret," "Bond," "Royal" and "Simplex " it is plain that many purchasers would be, and as the record shows, were in fact, deceived into the belief that respondents' sewing machines were made in the United States.

9. '" ot aJ!, but a substlmtial portion of the purchasing public has a decided preference for products of domestic manufacture over those of foreign make, particularly machinery of any kind, and when sewing macl1ines are advertised, exhibited, and offered for sale to the purchasing public and such articles are inadequately marked to show their fore.ign origin, 01' if marked and the m trkings are concealed such purchasing public understands and believes such articles to be wholly of domestic origin. A representative number of purchasers from respondents so testified.

10. The finding, accordingly, is that respondents' imported sewing machines and sewing machine heads are not adequately marked to show the place of manufacture and origin, that a number of purchasers from respondents bought them in the erroneous and mistaken belief that they were made in the United States and that they would not have purchased such machines if they hael known that they were imported from Japan.

Decision 51 F. T. C. 11. One purchaser from respondents testified that she informed respondent Pearsall, when she came in to inquire in response to respondents' advertising, that she wanted an American- made product and respondent Pearsall assured her that the machine that she purchased was not imported. This assertion was denied by respondent Pearsall. Since the complaint does not charge active and positive misrepresentatioll and deception, but only inadequate marking, the Hearing Examiner makes no finding on this conflicting evidence. 12. On the second charge in the complaint, that respondents advertised startlingly cheap merchandise, not for the purpose of sale, but with the intent, after llames and addresses had thus been received, of selling much more expensive and therefore profitable merchandise the record shows that respondents spent in excess of $18 000. 00 in one year in newspaper advertising at weekly intervals, and in excess of 000.00 a year in television and radio advertising, all in the New York City sales area alone, confined according to the exhibits, to sewing machines offered at $29. , $32. 50 and $39.50 with several att.achments included in these prices, and at times, free gifts of various sorts also included. Demonstration was offered free within 90 miles, delivery free within 50 miles. It is seldom that a new sewing machine can be obtained for less than $89.50 and upwards. 13, Examples of these advert.isements follow : 2 DAYS ONLY BRAND K!-JW 1951 SALE PRICED NOW.' HOUND BOBEll\ (Picturization of Portable SlDWli\TG MACHINE Electric Sewing Machine) 10 Year Part Guarantee Full Size Electric 1\odel including Carrying Case which can be used as an over'ight bag $29. SEWS EVERYTHING Full Cash Sews O.er Pins Automatic 'Tension Price Darns ldonograrns AC-DC :'Iotor Forward and Reyerse Stitch )iew Style Bobbin Winder Complete-Nothing extra to huy 10 DAY Hmri TRIAL 'l' Y it at home for 10 days. If you fire not pleased in every way, Bond refunds your deposit! BOND SEWIKG STORES 475 470 Decision BRAND NEW ROUND BOBBIN DEOORA7'OR CONSOLE SEWING MACHINE DARNS, JONOGRAMS (Picturization of Console AND EMBROIDERS Electric Sewing Machine) WITHOUT ATTACHME:\TTS! 32.

Full Cash Price 25 Weekly forward and reverse stitch sews over pins ae-de motor You get these BOND EXTRAS:

G FREE Attachments! Darner, Mender and Button-holder 1 Pinking Shears! Personal instruction! 20 YEAR PARTS GUARANTEE! Write or phone for FREE HOME DEMONSTRATION BOND Sewing Stores :MAIK SHO\VROOM:S IN r- EW YORK and vicinity 41-20 Queens Blvd.

1. C., N. Y.

Stores in New York Newark Philadelphia Baltimore An example of a television continuity of respondents on these same sewing machines is as follows:

AUDIO Allen Christopher presents Bond D Sewing Stores. Ladies, I guess all of you have dreamed of owning a beautiful modern portable electric sewing machine. Well, famous BOND SEWING STOUE makes your dream come true at last. . because you don t have to pay $200 for a good machine. You don t have to pay $100 . . . you don t even have to pay $50. How '''ould you like to get a brand new 1851 model ROUr\"D BOBBIN SEW. ING )'lachine Console Model deliverecl to your door for the amazing low price of only $39.50? You heard that did' nt you 1 $39.50 is not the down payment $3!).50 is ALL you pay for this beautiful machine. . . a full-size electric model that's just rolled off the assembly line. It's not rebuilt. It's not reconditioned. It' s a brand new machine from top to hottom, including the brand new motor and it comes ,vitb a wondel'fullO- year GlJARA1TIGlJ on parts. . and only $39.50 complete. rrhat's the full cash price. . and you can have easy terms even at that low price.

Decision 31 F. T. C. Ladies, you ll loYe this wonderful nra D :NEW 1951 ROU D BOBBIN Con sole Sewing Machine, This is not a chain stitch machine, it is I: ROUND BOBlux, Console machine.

You can lock stitch ,with it just as you do on machines costing $200 ado. $300. This machine is all-metal, with handsome chrome finish. . and watch now. I want to show you some of the special features. You call do your regular forward stitching of course and then. . at the flip of this lever, just like in expensive machines, you can do your rcverse stitching. 'l' bis magnificent new 1951 Console Model sewing machine can even sew right over pins " * '" in fact you can adjust it so beautifully that if you wanted to, you would sew right over toothpicks. Ladies, you are watcbing a remarkable machine .. , * a full-size electric portable machine * * * And it' Yours for only $39. 50. The machine runs on both AC and DC curent, so you can use it anywhere. And rememher, there s a terrifc 10-:year guarantee on parts. Your guarantee of confidence and satisfaction * * * a full 10-yearguarantee on parts. Ladies * * * when your beautiful new 1951 model machine arrives * " "' see how you can start whipping up those new Fall and 'Vinter drapes. Turn out s bool togs and Sunday best clothes for the Iddr1ies. See how you ll save dollars and dollars turning last year s dresses into the very latest styles. Make hats, mal,e doiles, and cmtnins for the house * * , anything you want. If you re not thriled, you return the machine. There s no o1Jligation yon owe nothing. The representative wil simply thank yon for letting him call. Folks, this is a special introductory offer-so here s something extra. When Bond delivers the machine to your door, your Bond representative wil give you at no extra charge with machine-a hostess set of 6 glasses, G fruit dishes, stirrers and a wooc1en tray '" '" * at no additional charge * * * with your machine.

So there you are * * '" the offer of a LIFETIrlE. First you get a brand new 1931 machine, NOT rebuilt O'1 reconditioned, but BR D XEW and reacly to serve you for years and years. It' s guaranteed. You get the special carrying case, pins the wonderful pinking shears "' * :; all at no extra cost, because you get e-verything for that one full cash price-nly $39. 50 complete * * * easy payment terms if you wish.

And folks, remember this. If you re not absolutely thriled \vitb the demonstration you are not obligated in any way. Bond's representative wil merely thank you for allowing bim to show you this amazing machine. You owe nothing. That's all there is to it. You simply cannot lose. I'm just Sorrj' that \ve don t have enough machines for EVERY WO:3IA wlll ll want one * '" .. so don t miss out. Call or write now, 14. It is true that the record shows that when anyone attracted by these advertisements came in, that the machine advertised was on hand in adequate supply, that it was shown and demonstrated, that if the potential customer called, the machine advertised was taken out to his or he.r home and demonstrated, that if the customer was insistent the machine was sold and at the price advertised. Kevertheless, other facts in the record convince the Ilea ring Examiner that respondents had no intention of selling the maehines advertised, but that the whole cfl'ort "\as a sales scheme, deliberately conceived and executed to obtain BOND SEWING STORES 477 470 Decision thereby the names of people interested in purchasing sewing machines (not otherwise easily identifiable) and then deliberately to high pressure them into buying sewing machines for between $100.00 and $200.00.

15. These facts arc as follows: the machine advertised by respondnts lor $29. 50 cost respondents about 824.00; the $32. ;)0 11nchi11e cost $30.00; the $39.50 machine cost $28.00. In addition, there was a minimum salesmen s commission of $2.00. Respondent Pearsall O/rt salary. lIetestified that most salesmen worked on commission \vas very vague about travel allowances and was unable to say any. thing definite about overhead allocation. It is obvious, however that the expensive advertising load, the expenses of running a $1 500 (100 annual business with many retail outlets in five or six states, the expenses of giving free demonstrations in a radius of 90 miles and free delivery \within 50 miles must have more than consumed the $3. 50 margin on the $29.50 machine, the 501 margin on the $32. machine and substantially consumed the $9.50 margin on the $39. machine. In fact, respondent Pearsall admitted that respondents could not have remained in business selling these items alone. 16. Respondent Pearsall admitted in testimony that his salesmen usually" carry along much more expensive sewing machines (those "selling for $100.00 upwards) with them when demonstrating these three machines described above. From the testimony of purchasers from respondents, this would appear to be an 1UlVarying practice. lcespondent Pearsall also admitted in testifying that "occasionally 11is salesmen have disparaged the machines advertised, when demon- 8trating them to a customer who ca.lled in response to the advertising but that he always discharged them if witness heard of it. But the unanimous testimony of the consumer-purchasers was to the effect t hat this was a constant practice, that the salesmen were unable to make the machines, about which the customers called, work, or if they did, the customers were unable to do so, the salesmen explaining t hat the machines would j am unless the pressure on the foot pedals "\vas just so much and no more; that the salesmen explained to the potential customer that she could not get parts for replacement, in spite of the fact that respondents advertised a 10-year guarantee on parts, and that the salesmen assured the prospects that if they wanted a good working machine which would give them good service the salesmen had just the thing out in their cars. The salesman would then get it, compare the two machines, and make every effort to sell the latter. This was natural inasmuch as his commission would then be 15 percent of the sales price of $139.50 or $179. , as the case Decision 5I F. T. C. might be. The prospect would then be further intrigued by that threadbare but still potent bait that she could have the machine at $10.00 or $15.00 oft the price because the machine had a small scratch un the enamel, which scratch could seldom be found. 17. The ofter to sell as advertised was not bona fide; the Hearing Examiner has no doubt from seeing and hearing these witnesses and the respondent Pearsall that respondents' salesmen-not just one, but several actively and deliberately disparaged the machines advertised and had no intention of seJJng them unless it was a case of oelling them or not selling anything at all. Respondent PcarsalJ admitted also the obvious, that respondents prefer to selJ the much more expensive machines; that complaints have been made to respondents of their salesmen disparaging the machines advertised and of using high-pressure tactics to get prospects to purchase the more expensive machines. Coupled with the further facts that 80 percent of the sales were on calls, 20 percent in respondents' stores; that only 25 percent of the units sold by respondents, and only 8 to 10 percent of their sales volume, were in these cheap machines, and 75 percent of these cheap machines sold were returned, mostly for dissatisfaction and most.y as trade-ins on the more expensive machines; the picture 10 the Hearing Examiner is that of high-pressure advertising of a loss leader, certainly known by respondents, after seve.ral years of such experience, not to be a satisfactorjly operable sewing machine to the majority of those responding to the advertising, with disparagement thereof, and insistent attempts to sell other and more profitable products.

18. Furthermore, respondents' advertising set out by sample in extenso in paragraph No. 13 above, directly represents, in the I-learing Examiner s opinion, to the typical housewife or other pot mtiaI purchaser inexpert in t.he construction, repair or Use of a temperamental sewing lnachine first, that the machine advertised was operable by any reader and was in fact quite versatile in its sewing abilities, second, that parts being guaranteed for ten years, were easily replaceable if and ,,,hen brokeD. These representations, all the record here.in were deceptive and misleading, if not actually false. Potential customer were consistently told that part replacements ,were unobtfliwlble, and actually shown by demonstration, that the machines advertised were either not operabJe at all, or operable only with great C8.re--as a practical matter, unusable by the typical prospect for the purpose advertised.

19. Respondents a.re admittedly in competition with other perSOllS firms and corporations, but there is no substantial evide,nce in thc" BOND SEWING STORES 479 470 Order record of the kind and extent of this competition nor any proof that respondents' acts and practices as hereinabove found have diverted, fairly or unf"irJy, substantial trade to them from their competitors or caused substantial injury to competition in commerce. CONCLCSION 1. Respondents' ads and practices as hereinabove found are all to the prejudice and injury of the public and constitute unfair "nd deceptive acts and practices in commerce within the intent and meaning of t.he Federal Trade Commission Act.

Z. The fact that during the pendency of this proceeding, respondents went into bankrupt.cy, either voluntary or at the instance of creditors, and that their assets are consequently in the custody of a trustee, is no har to the issuance of the cease and desist order herein below issued. That corrective action in no way directly affects the ratable distribution of assets, but. corrects only the commercial practices of respondents in selling or creating those assets. 3. Bankruptcy, of course, causes a cessation of the practices herein attacked, but only temporarily. This proceeding is not only against the partnership which is in bankruptcy, but is also against the individuals composing that partnership. Those individllals may alone in a new partnership ,with each other, or in concert with others, engage in the same business and 'use the same practices herein found to be il1legal. This is not the case of a corporation whose ba,nkrllptcy nsnaJJy ends the corporate identity for.11 purposes.' There is nothing in this record to warrant the Hearing Examiner in believing that t11ere will be no resumptlon. The practices herein found to be illegal are too commercially attractive, insidious, smooth and profitable not to encourage repetition, absent anything to indicate they win not. Bankruptcy is but a temporary suspension at best. ORDER It ;8 ordaed That the respondents ,ViJJam R. 1'C"r8a1l, Francis Colucci and Aaron Silverman, individually and as copartners, doing business as Bond Sewing St.ores or under any other name, their ie,presentatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the offering for sale, sale, or distribution of sewing machine heads, or sC1dng machines, in commerce as "commerce." is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act do forthwith cease and desist from:

''The Gillter Case, 186 F. 2d 810 is Dot in point. here corpora tions ilissolved. 42:-78;;-t'R- Opinion 51 F.

1. Offering for sale, selling or distributing foreign-made sewing machine heads or sewing machines of which foreign-made heads are a part, without clearly and conspicuously disclosing on the heads the country of origin thereof, in such a manner that it cannot readily be hidden or obliterated.

2. R.cpresenting, directly or indirectly, that sewing machine parts are guaranteed for 10 years, or any other period of time, when such parts are in fact unobtainable.

3. Representing in any manner, a sewing machine as operable and as satisfactory for everyday usage by one without special know ledge or training, when in fact it is not operable at all, or when in fact it can be operated only with special precautions. 4. The use of any sales plan or procedure involving the use of deceptive or misleading statements or representations in advertising which are designed to obtain leads or prospects for the sale of other or different merchandise than that advertised. Order dated January 24, 18G5 denying, for failure to file within the 60-day period set by Commission s Rules of Practice, motion by counsel supporting the complaint requesting an extension of time within which to file brief on appeal from initial decision. oUDEn REJECTING l\rOTIOX FOR EXTENSION OF TIME This matter coming on to be heard upon the motion flied on N vember 26, 1954, by counsel supporting the complaint requesting an extensiou of time within which to file brief on appeal from the initial decision; and The Commission having determined, for reasons stated in the opinion accompanying this order, that such motion should not be entertained:

It i ordered That the motion of counsel supporting the complaint , and it hereby is, denied.

OPINION OF THE CQl\nnSSlaN By GWYNXE, Commissioner:

Presented for our determina,tion here is a motion filed on N ovembel' 26 , 1954, by counsel supporting the complaint requesting a thirtyclay extension of time within which to fie his brief on appeal from the initial decision. It is stated in support of the request that the failure to file appeal brief within the time prescribed under the Com- BOXD SEWTG STORES 481 Opinion.

mission s Rules of Practice occurred through inadvertence incident to counsel's absence from \Vashington on other hearings, and no answer in opposition to such motion has been filed by the respondents. IVe have concluded, however, that under applicable provisions of those rules, the initial decision must be deemed to have become the decision of the Commission on Xovember 23 1954, and that the motion of ovember 26, 1954, accordingly should not be entertained. In these connections, "We note that the service card in the record attests receipt of service of the initial decision on behalf of counsel mpporting the complaint under date of October 20, 1954, and service of the initial decision upon the parties was completed thereafter on October 23, 1954. Timely notice of intention to appeal pursuant to the requirements of subparagraph (a) of Rule XXIII, was filed by counsel supporting the complaint on October 29, 1954. Subparagraph (f) of Rule XXIII provides that an appeal brief shall bc fUed within thirty days from service of the initial decision. The brief on appeal accordingly, was due to be filed on or before Kovembcl' 19, 1954, such date being thirty days after service upon appellant of the initial decision.

A companion rule, Rule XXII of the Commission s Rules of Pract.ice, ,provides that the initial decision shall become the decision of the Commission thirty days from service thereof upon the parties unless prior thereto (1) an appeal is filed under the provisions of Rule XXIII, (2) the Commission, by order, stays the effective date of the decision, or (3) the Commission, upon its own initiative, issues an order placing the case on its own docket for review. Although Rule XXIII provides that any party who has duly fied notice of intention to appeal may ap,peal from an initial decision, neither of these Tules, however, contemplates that fulfillment of the requirement for timely notice constitutes the filing of the appeal itself. Neither contingency (2) nor contingency (3) mentioned above ever occurred. As of November 19 , 1954, no brief on appeal had been filed and no motion in lieu thereof requesting an extension of time for good cause shown had been submitted, as permitted under Rule XI. The operation of Rule XXII, accordingly, was not stayed and the initial decision of the hearing examiner must be deemed to have become the decision of the Commission on November 23 , 1954, which date re,presents the thirty-first day after service of the initial decision upon the parties. In these circumstances, therefore, the motion should not be entertained and our order \"hieh is separately issuing he.re provides for its denial.

Order 5I F. T. C. ORDER OF THE COMMISSION The hearing examiner having filed his initial decision herein and counsel supporting thecowplaint having seasonably filed a. notice of his intention to appeal from said initial decision, but no appeal brief ha ving been filed within the time provided by the Commission s Rules of Practice:

Now therefore, pursuant to Rules XXII :mcl XXIII of the Commission s Hules of Practice, the attached initial decision of the hearing examiner did automatically, on November 23, 1954, become the decision of the Commission.

It is o1'dered That the respondents shall, within sixty (60) clay6 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 the order to cease and desist. , .

LOAMIUM CO. OF AMERICA 483 Complaint