Ainbinder & Son, Inc.

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

In THE Matrer or AINBINDER & SON, INC., ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE FUR PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket 7648. Complaint, Nov. 3, 1959—Decision, Mar. 15, 1960 Consent order requiring a New York City furrier to cease violating the Fur Products Labeling Act by failing to set forth on invoices the terms ‘Per- . sian Lamb,” “Dyed Mouton-processed Lamb,” and “Secondhand used fur” where required, and to comply in other respects with labeling and invoicing requirements.

Mr. Charles Donelan for the Commission.

Respondents, pro se.

Inimia, Decision sy Epnear A. Burrur, Hearrye Examiner On November 8. 1959, the Federal Trade Commission issued its complaint against the above-named respondents charging them with violation of the provisions of the Federal] Trade Commission Act. and the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated under said Fur Products Labeling Act in connection with the introduction into commerce, and the sale, advertising and offering for sale, transportation and distribution of fur products. On December 17, 1959, the respondents and counsel supporting the complaint entered into an agreement containing a consent. order to cease and desist in accordance with section 3.25(a) of the Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Commission. Under the foregoing agreement, the respondents admit the jurisdictional facts alleged in the complaint and agree, among other things, that the cease and desist order there set. forth may be entered without further notice and shall have the same force and effect as if entered after a full hearing. The agreement includes a waiver by the respondents of all rights to challenge or contest the validity of the order issuing in accordance therewith; and recites that the said agreement shall not become a part of the official record unless and until it becomes a part of the decision of the Commission, and that it is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by the respondents that they have violated AINBINDER & SON, INC., ET AL. 1065 1064 Order the law as alleged in the complaint. The hearing examiner finds that the content of the said agreement meets all the requirements of section 3.25(b) of the Rules of Practice. This proceeding having now come on for final consideration by the hearing examiner on the complaint and the aforesaid agreement for consent order, and it appearing that said agreement provides for an appropriate disposition of this proceeding, the aforesaid agreement is hereby accepted and is ordered filed upon becoming part of the Commission’s decision in: accordance with section 3.21 of the Rules of Practice; and in consonance with the terms of said agreement, the hearing examiner makes the following jurisdictional findings and order:

1. Respondent Ainbinder & Son. Inc. is a corporation existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, with its office and principal place of business located at 127 West 29th Street, in the City of New York, State of New York. Individual respondent Israel Ainbinder is president of the said corporate respondent and controls, directs and formulates the acts, practices and policies of the said corporate respondent. His office and principal place of business is the same as that of the said corporate respondent.

2. The Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this proceeding and of the respondents hereinabove named. The complaint states a cause of action against said respondents under the Federal Trade Commission Act, and this proceeding js in the interest of the public.

ORDER It is ordered, That respondents, Ainbinder & Son, Inc., a corporation, and its officers, and Israel Ainbinder, 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 into commerce, or the sale, advertising. or offering for sale, in commerce of fur products, or in connection with the sale, advertising, offering for sale, transportation, or distribution of fur products which are made in whole or in part of fur which has been shipped and received in commerce, as “commerce,” “fur” and “fur product” are defined in the Fur Products Labeling Act, do forthwith cease and desist from misbranding fur products by:

1. Failing to affix labels to fur products showing in letters and figures plainly legible all of the information required to be dis- Sylatvus 96 FTC.

closed by each of the subsections of Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act.

2. Falsely or deceptively invoicing fur products by: A. Failing to furnish to purchasers of fur products an invoice showing all the information required to be disclosed by each of the subsections of Section 5(b)(1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act. B. Falsely or deceptively invoicing or otherwise identifying any such product as to the name or names of the animal or animals that produced the fur from which such product was manufactured. C. Setting forth information required under Section 5(b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in abbreviated form. D. Failing to set forth the term “Persian Lamb” in the manner required by Rule 8 of said Rules and Regulations. E. Failing to set forth the term “Dyed Mouton processed Lamb” in the manner required by Rule 9 of said Rules and Regulations. F. Failing to disclose that fur products contain or are composed of “secondhand used fur” when such is the fact. G. Failing to set forth on invoices the item number or mark assigned to a fur product.

DECISION OF THE COMMISSION AND ORDER TO FILE REPORT OF COMPLIANCE Pursuant to Section 3.21 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice, the initial decision of the hearing examiner shall, on the 15th day of March, 1960, become the decision of the Commission; and, accordingly :

It is 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 the order to cease | and desist.