Sun-Fast Textiles, Inc.

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

IN THE MATTER OF SUN-FAST TEXTILES, IXC., ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER , ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE Cold.fSSION ACT Docket 8153. Complaint, Oct 24, 1960-Decision, Mar. 4. 1961 Consent order requiring :Kew York City distributors of imported and domestic cotton fabrics to garment manufacturers to cease labeling and invoicing their domestic cotton fabrics falsely as "India Type ),Iadras COMPLAINT Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act and by virtue of the authority vested in it by said Act, the Federal Trade Commission having reason to believe that Sun-Fast Textiles FEDERAL TRADE IMISSIOK DECISIONS286 Complaint 58 F.

Inc., a corporation, Moses Schonfeld and Ruth B. Schonfeld, individually and as offcers of said corporation, hereinafter referred to as respondents, have violated thc provisions of said Act and appearing to the Commission that a proceeding by it in respect thereof would be in the public interest, hereby issues its complaint stating its chaI'ges in that respect as follows: PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent Sun-Fast Textiles, Inc. , is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue 01 the Ja"s of the State of New York, with its principal offce and place of business located at 125 west 41st Street, Xe" York, l\ew York. Respondents :\loses Schonfeld and Ruth B. Schonfeld are offcers of the said corporate respondent. They formulate, direct and control the acts and practices hereinafter set forth. Their address is the same as that of the corporate respondent. PAR. 2. Respondents are no", and for some time last past have been, engaged in advertising, ouering for sale, sale and distribution of imported and domestic cotton fabrics to garment manufacturers. PAIL 3. In the course and conduct of their business, respondents now cause, and for some time last past have caused, their said prodbusiness in theucts when sold to be shipped from their place of State of ew York, to purchasers thereof located in various other states of the United States and in the District of Columbia, and mainta, , and at all times mentioned herein have maintained, a substantial course of trade in saiel products in commerce, as "com. merce" is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act. PAR. 4. Respondents, for the purpose of inducing the purchase of their products, have engaged in the practice of misrepresenting bythe material of "which their products are made or composed, labeling and invoicing their domestic cotton fabrics as "India Type Madras . In truth and in fact, the said domestic cotton fabrics are not "India Type Madras By use of such representations all labels and invoices, respondents represent that their domestic color-fast fabrics are the Madras cotton fabrics imported from India, which have a distinctive character and quality.

The word "Madras" has long been applied to a fabric produced in the xIadras Province of India and is made of fine handloomed cotton, and if in a color other than natural, is dyed "ith bleeding vegetable dyes. Such fabric has for a long time been "elJ and fa vorably known to the purchasing public.

PAR. 5. By the aforesaid practices, the respondents place in the hands of garment manufacturers and others the means and instru- , .!.

FAST 'TEXTILES , INC. , ET AL. 287 285 Decision mentalities by and through which they may mislead the public as to the character and quality of their products. PAR. G. In the conduct of their business at an times mentioned herein, respondents have been in substantial competition in comme.rce with corporations, firms and individuals in the sale of mereh8-ndise of the same general kind and nature as that sold by respondents.

PAR. 7. The use by respondents of the aforesaid false, misleading and deceptive statements, representations and practices has had and HOW has the tendency and capacity to mislead members of the purchasing public into the erroneous and mistaken belief that said stateme,nts and representlltions "ere and a.re true and into the purchase of substantial quantities of respondents' products by reason of sairl erroneous and mista.ken belief. As a, consequence thereof, substantial trade in commerce has been and is being unfairly diverted to re,spondents from their competitors and substantial injury has t1wl'eby been and is being done to competition in commerce. PAIl. 8. The aforesflid acts and practices of respondents as herein n11egcd "ere and are a11 to the prejudice and injury of the public and to respondents' competitors and constituted, and now constitute, unfair and deceptive acts and practices and unfair methods of competition in COllnerce within the intent and meaning or the Federal Trade Commission Act.

Mr. Harry E. Middleton supporting the complaint. llfr. J'U1i l8 J. Rosen of New York for respondents. INITIAL D:ZCISIOX BY .J OHN B. PorXDEXTEH, HEARING EXAl\IIXER On October 24, 1960 , the Federal Trade Commission issued a complaint charging that the above-named respondents had violated the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act. The complaint alleged that respondents had misrepresented the material of "which their products are made or composed.

After issuance and service of the eomplaint the respondents, their attorney, and counsel supporting the complaint entered into an agreement for a consent order. The agreement has been approved by the Acting Director, Associate Director and the Assistant Director of the Burerm of Litigation. The agreement disposes of the matters complained about.

The pertinent provisions of said agreement are as rollows: Respondents admit an jurisdictional facts; the complaint may be used in construing the terms of the order; the order shall have the same force and effect as if entered after a full hearing and the said 288 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSIO DECISIONS Order 58 F.

agreement shall not become a part of the offcial record of the proceeding unless and until it becomes a part of the decision of the Commission; the record herein shall consist solely of the complaint and the agreement; respondents waive the requirement that the decision must contain a statement. of findings of fact. and conclusion of law; respondents "aive further procedural steps before the hearing examiner and the Commission, and the order may be altcI'ccl modified, or set aside in the manner provided by statuto for other orders; respondents \'mive any right to challenge or contest the Y,1.1idity of the order entered in aecordance with the agreement and the signing of said agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by respondents that they hflve violated the Ia ,\y as al1egcd in the complaint. The undersigned hearing examiner having considered the agreement rtnd proposed order, hereby accepts such agreement, makes the follmving jurisdictional findings, and issues the following order: JURISDICTIO:\TAL FINDINGS 1. Respondent Sun-Fast Textiles, Inc. is a corporation organizcc1 existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of N e" Y ark, "ith its principal offce and place of business located at 125 'West 41st Street, Ne" York, Ke" York. 2. Respondents Ioses Schonfeld and Ruth B. Schonfeld are offcers of the said corporate respondent. They formulate, direct and control the ads and practices of the corporate respondent. Their address is the same as that of the corporate.e respondent. 3. The Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this proceeding and of the respondents hereinabove named and the proceeding is in the public interest. ORDER It is ordered That respondents Sun-Fast Textiles, Inc., a corporation and its offcers, and Moses Schonfeld and Ruth B. Schonfeld individually and as offteers of said corporation, and respondents agent.s, representatives and employees, directly or through any corporat.e or other device, in connection with the offering for sale, sale or distribution of fabrics or other textile products in commerce as "commerce" is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act, do forthwith cease and desist from:

1. Using the word "M:adras" or any simulation thereof, either alone or in connection with other "ords to designate, describe, or refer to any fabric or other textile product "hieh is not in fact made of fine cotton, hand-loomed and imported from India, and if the FELL-BASS , INC. , ET AL. 289 285 Decision cloth is other than natural in color, has not been dyed "ith bleeding vegetable dyes.

2. Placing in the hands of garment manufacturers and others a means and instrumentality by and through which they may deceive and mislead the purchasing public, concerning merchandise in the respects set out in Paragraph 1, above.

DECISIO OF THE COl\DIISSION ,D ORDF.R 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 Mh day of ldarch, 1961, 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 "ith the Commission a report in ",vritjng setting forth in detail the manl1er and form in "which they have complied "ith the order to cease and desist. Ix THE IATTR OF FELL-BASS, INC., ET AL.

COKSEXT ORDER , ETC. , IX REGARD TO THE .1ALLEGED VIOLATION OF Tile FEDERAL TRADE COllDrL."SIOS A D THE WOOL PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Dooket 7681. COInplaEnt, Dec. 1959-Decision, Mar. , 1961 Consent order requiring Kew York City manufacturers to cease violating the Wool Products Labeling Act by tagging as "100% Virgin Wool" , ladies skirts composed of fabrics containing substantially less than 100% wool and by failng to label other wool products as required. Mr. Charles W. Connell for the Commission. DECISION OF THE CO::BIISSION AS '1'0 RESPONDENT SAM FELl.. The hearing examiner s init.ial decision, wherein the hearing examiner accepted an agreement containing a consent order to cease and desist theretofore executed by the respondents and counsel in support of the eomphint, having been served all respondent Sam Fell on February 2, 1961;

Xow, therefore, pursuant to Sec. 3.21 of the Commission s Rules of Practice, said initial decision shall, on March 7, 1961, become the decision of the Commission; and, accordingly, . ln1tal decision as to all respondents published in 56 F. C. 1181. 081-237--63-- Complaint 58 )j It is orde/ed That respondent Sam FeJl, individually and as an offcer of FeJl-Bass, Inc., a corporation, shall, "within sixty (60) days after service upon him of this order, fie "ith the Commission a report, in writing, setting forth in detail the manner and form in "which he has complied "ith the order to cease and desist contained in the aforesaid initial decision.

Ix THE :\LATTER OF ULTRA VISION :\IAXUFACTURING CORPORATIOJ' ET AL. COX SENT ORDER , ETC. , IN REGARD TO THE ALLEr,ED VIOL \.TION m' THE FEDERAL TRADE CO)BnSSION ACT Docket 8106. Cmnplaint, A. 1/g. 1960-Deci. ion, JIa1' , 1961 Consent order requiring manufacturers of television picture tubes in Eaw thorne, N. J., to cease sellng television tubes which were reactivated or reconditioned or rebuilt containing previously used parts without clearly disclosing such facts on the tubes themselves and on cartons and invoices. fPLAIKT Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Tra,de Commission Act and by virtue of the authority vested in it by said Act, the Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that Ultra vision ianufacturing Corporf\Jion, a eor-poration, and Carmine Cifaldi, inclividually and as an offcer of said corporation, hereinafter referred to as respondents, have violated the provisions of said act, and it appearing to the Commission that a proceeding by it in respect thereof "onld be in the public interest, hereby issues its complaint, stating its charges in that respect as follows:

PARAGMPH 1. Respondent IDtravision Manufacturing Corporation is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the la"s of the state of Ne" Jersey, with its offce and principal place of business located at 185 Goffe Road, Ha,,thorne, Now Jersey.

Respondent Carmine Cifaldi is president of said corporation. He formulates, directs and cont.rolls 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. PAR. 2. Respondents are now, and for some time last past ha been, engaged in the manufacture, oiIering 'for sale, sale and distribution of television picture tubes, some of which arc reactivated or reconditioned and some of which are rebuilt containing used parts to distributors "ho sell to retailers for resale to the pub lie. l.LTRA VISION MA-,"UFACTURm"G CORP. ET AL. 291 290 Complaint PAR. 3. In thc course and conduct of their business, respondents now cause, and for SOInc time last past have caused, their said products, "hen sold, to bc shipped from their place of business in the State of N e" Jersey to purcJmsers thereof Jocated in various other States of the United States, and maintain, and at aU times mentioned herein have maintained, a substantial COUfse of trade in said products in commerce, as "commerce" is defined in the Federal Trade Com mission Act.

PAR. 4. gespondents do not disclose on the tubes or on the cartons in which t.hey are packed or on invoices or in any other manner that said television picture tubes are reactivated or reconditioned or rebuilt containing previously used parts. PAn. 5. 'Vhen television tubes are reactivated or reconditioned or rebuilt containing previously used parts, in the absence of a djsclosure to the contrary, such tubes arc understood to be and are readily accepted by the public as ne" tubes.

PAn. 6. By failing to disclose the facts as set out in Paragraph Four, respondents place in the hands of uninformed or unscrupulous dealers means and instrumentalities "hereby they may mislead and deceive the public as to the nature of their said television picture tubes.

PAR. 7. In the conduct of their business, and at all times mentioned herein, respondents have been in substantial competition, in commerce, "ith corporations, firms and individuals engaged in the sale of television picture tubes.

PAIL 8. The failure of respondents to disclose on their television picture tubes, on the cartons in ,which they are packed, on invoices or in any other manner, that they are reactivated or reconditioned or rebuilt containing used parts, has had and now has, the tendency and capacity to mislead members of the purchasing public into the erroneous and mistaken belief that their said picture tubes are new in their entirety, and into the purchase of substantial quantities of respondents' said tubes by reason of such erroneous and mistaken belief. As a consequence thereof, substantial trade in commerce has been, and is being, unfairly diverted to respondents from their competitors and substantial injury has thereby been, and is being, done to competition in commerce.

PAR. 9. The aforesaid acts and practices of respondents, as herein alleged, "ere, and are, aU to the prejudice and injury of the public and of respondents' competitors and constituted, and now constitute unfair and deceptive acts and practices and unfair methods of competition, in commerce, "within the intent and meaning of the Federal Trade Commission Act.

Decision 58 F.

Mr. Michael J. Vitale for the Commission. Mr'. Morton L. Kimmelman of New York, N. Y., for respondents. INITIAL DECISIO BY 1VALTER R. JOHXSON, HEARING EXAMINER In the complaint dated August 29 , 1960, the respondents are charged with violating the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act.

On December 20, 1960, the respondents and their attorney entered into an agreement with counsel in support of the complaint for a consent order.

Under the foregoing agreement, the respondents admit the jurisdictional facts allegeu. in the complaint. The parties agree, among other things, that the cease and desist order there set forth may be entered "without further notice and have the same force and effect as if entered after a full hearing and the document includes a "aiver by the respondents of all rights to challenge or contest the validity of the order issuing in accordance therewith. The agreement further recites that it is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by the respondents that they have violated the la" as alleged in the complaint.

The hearing examiner finds that the content of the agreement meets all of the requirements of section 3.25 (b) of the Riles of the Commission.

The hearing examiner being aT the opinion that the agreement and the proposed order provide an appropriate basis for disposition of this proceeding as to all of thc parties, the agreement is hereby accepted and it is ordered that the agreement shall not become a part of thc oi!cial record of the proceeding unless and until it becomes a part of thc decision of the Commission. The follo"ing jurisdictional rmdings are made and the follo"ing order issued. 1. Respondent Gltravision Manufacturing Corporation is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New Jersey, with its offce and principal place of business located at 185 Goffe Road, Hawthorne, New Jersey. Respondent Carmine Cibldi is president of said corporation. formulates, directs and controls the acts and practices of the corporate respondent. His address is the same as that of the corporate respondent.

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.

TROPICAL FLOWERLAND ET AL. 293 290 Syllabus ORDER It is ordered That respondents Ultravision Manufacturing Corporation, a corporation, and its offccr., and Carmine Cifaldi individually and as an offcer of said corporation, and respondents' representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the offering for sale, sale or distribution of television picture tubes "hieh have been reactivated or reconditioned, or which have been rebuilt containing used parts in commerce, as "commerce" is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act, do forth"ith cease and desist from: 1. Failing to clearly disclose on the tubes, on the cartons in which they are packed, on invoices, and in advertising, that said tubes are react..dated or reconditioned, or rebuilt and contain used parts, as the case may be.

2. Placing any means or instrumentality in the hands of others whereby they may mislead thc public as to the nature and condition of their television picture tubes.

DECISION OF 'fhe C01DnSSIOR AND ORDER '10 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 7th day of March, 1961 , become the decision of the Commission; and accordingly:

It is ordered That respondents herein shall, "within sixty (60) days after servioe upon them of this order, file "ith the Commission a report in writing setting forth in detail the manner -and form in "which they have complied ,yjth the order to cease and desist. IN THE :\fA'IER OF TROPICAL FLOWERLAXD ET AL.

CONSENT Order, ETC. , IK REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATIQX OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION ACT Docket 8114. CO'npl, aint, SP-pt. 1960-Decislon, Ma1' 1961 Consent order requiring Los Angeles, Calif., sellers of a course of instruction on the growing or orchids and of orchid plants to the public in connection therewith, to cease representing falsely in advertising that by buying the orchid plants set out in their so-called "wholesale catalog at the listed prices and sellng them at retail, purchasers of their course could expect to make substantial profits.

294 FEDERAL TRADE COMJHI8SIO'" DECISIONS Complaint 58 F.

COMPLAINT Pl1TSmmt to the provisions or the Federal Trade Commission Act and by virtue of the authority vested in it by said Act, the Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that Tropical FJower- Jand, a corporation, and George T. I-Iambangh and Rste,ne 1\1. Hambaugh, i.ndividually and as officers of said corporation, hereinafter rererred to as respondents, have violated the provisions of said Act find 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 Tropical Flowerland is a. corporate.ion organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the la"s of the State of California "ith its offce and principal place of business located at 100 South Vermont Avenue, Los Angeles California.

Respondents George T. Jlambaugh and Estelle )1. I-Iambaugh are offcers of sllid corporation. They formulate, direct and control the policies, acts and practices of said corporation. Their address is the same as that of the corporate respondent. PAll. 2. Respol1c1en ts arc nmv, and for some time ha vc been engaged in the advertising, offering for sale sale and distribution of It course of instruction on the raising or growing of orchids and the eae of orchid plants to the public.

PAR. 3. In the course and conduct of their business, respondents have caused their products, "hen sold, to be transported from their place of business in the State of California to the purchasers thereof located in other States of the 'Cnited States and maintain, and at alj times ment.ioned herein have maint:lined, a substantial course of trade in said products in commerce, as "commerce:: is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act.

PAR. 4. Hespon(lents, in the course and conduct of their business are now, and have been, in substantial competition, in commerce "ith corporations, firms and individuals in the sale of products of the same general kind and nature as those sold by the respondents. PAR. 5. In the course and conduct of their aforesaid business, and for the purpose of inducing the sale of their products, respondents have caused advertisements to be placed in various publications having a distribution in the various States of the United States. Respondents have also caused advertisements of their products be mailed to prospective purchasers in States other than the State of Cn jifornia.

TROPICAL FLOWERLAKD ET AL. 295 293 Complaint PAIL 6. Respondents furnish t"o orchid plants to the purchasers of their course of instruction. Among the statements in their advertising matter arc the following:

,With your Course, Tropical Flowerland includes a "Quick-Profit Plan" which lets yon start taking orders for Orchid plants immediately-the orders to be filed from our stock, while waiting for your own to develop. Take orders now-to he filled from our big stock. Lutz you have plants of your own to sell, you may take orders from Tropical Flowerland' s beautiful ilustrated catalog. Orchids like those pictured in this folder and many others, priced to you at our wholesale so you may make big profits.

The catalog referred to is designated as "wholesale catalog. PAR. 7. Through the use of the aforesaid statements, and others of the same import not specifically set out herein, and the designation "'Vholesale Catalog, respondents represent that the prices set out in t.their catalog for the various orchid plants and other merchandise are wholesale prices and that the purchasers of their courses by purchasing the orchid plants set out therein at the listed prices, can cxpeet to obtain substantial profits by sellng such plants at retail prices.

\R. 8. Said statenwnts and representations were false, misleading and deceptive. In t.ruth and in fact, the prices quoted in said catalog are substantially in excess of the wholesale prices for most or all, of the orchid plants and other merchandise listed in said catalog- and arc, in many insta,nces as much or more thftn the usual and customary retail prices. There is consequently little or no profit that con be realizcd from sales at retail of orchid plants purchased from respondents at their cat.along prices. m. 9. The use by respondents of the aforesaid false, misleading and deceptive statements and representations has hnd, and now has the capacity and tendency to mislead and deceive members of the purchasing public into the erroneous and mistaken belief that said staiements and representations were, and are, true a.nd into the purchase of a substantial number and quantity of respondents ' said products because of such erroneous and mistaken belief. As a result thereof, trade has been unfairly diverted to respondents from their competitors and injury has thereby been done to competition in commerce.

PAR. 10. The aforesaid acts and practices of respondents, as herein alleged, were, and are, all to the prejudice and injury of the public and of respondents competitors and constituted, and now constitute unfair and deceptive acts and practices and unfair methods of competition, in commerce, within the intent and meaning of the Federal Trade Commission Act.

Decision 58 F.

T. lJ orton Nesmith for the Commission. 3fT. Henry Junge of Chicago, Ill. , for respondents. IXITIL DECISION BY LOREX 1-1. LAUGHLIN, HEARING EXAMINER The Federal Trade Commission (sometimes also hereinafter , issued itsreferred to as the Commission) on September 15, 1960 complaint herein, charging the above-named respondents with having violated the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act in certain particulars, and respondents were duly served "ith process. On unary 16 , 1961 , there \Vas submitted to the undersignecl hearing examiner of the Commission, for his consideration and a approval, an "Agreement Containing Consent Order To Cease And Desisf, which had been entered int.o by and between respondents and counsel for both parties, under date of .January 9, 1961, subject to the appronl.l of the Bureau of Litigation of the Commission which had subsequently duly approved the same.

On clue consideration of such agreement, the hearing examiner finds that said agreement, both in form and in content, is in accord with 23 of the Commission s Rules of Practice for Adjudicative Proceedings, and that by said agreement the parties have specifically agreed to the folJo"ing matters: 1. H,respondent Tropical Flo-werbnd is a corporation organized existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of California, with its offce and principal place or business located at 100 South Vermont Avenue, in the City of Los Angeles State of California.

Respondents George T. Hambaugh and Estc11e 1\1. Hambaugh are offcers of said corporation. They formulate, direct and control the policies, flcts and practices of said corporation. Their address is the same as that of the corporate respondent. 2. Respondents admit a11 the jurisdictional facts alleged in the complaint and agree that the record may be taken as if findings or jurisdictional facts had been duJy made in accordance with such allegations.

3. This agreement disposes of al1 of this proceeding to a11 parties. 4. Hespondents waive:

(a) Any further procedural steps before the hearing examiner and the Commission;

(b) Thc making of findings of fact or conclusions of 1a,,; and (c) Alj of the rights they may have to challenge or contest the validity of the order to cease and desist entered in accordance with this agreement.

TROPICAL FLOWERLAKD ET AL. 297 293 Decision 5. The record on "which the initial decision and the decision of the Commission shall be based shall consist solely of the complaint and this agreement.

6. This agreement shall not become a part of the offcial record unless and unti it becomes a part of the decision of the Commission. 7. This agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by respondents that they have violated the law as alleged in the complaint.

S. The follo"ing order to cease and desist may be entered in this proceeding by the Commission without further notice to respondents. '''hen so entered, it shall have the same force and effect as if entered after a full hearing. It may be altered, modified or set aside in the manner provided for other orders. The complaint may be used in construing the terms of the order.

"Gpon due consideration of the complaint filed herein and the said "Agreement Containing Consent Order To Cease And Desist" the hearing examiner approves and accepts this agreement; finds that the Commission has jurisdiction of the subject-matter of this procecding and of the respondents herein; that the complaint states a legal cause for complaint under the Federal Trade Commission Act against the respondents, both generally and in each of the particulars alleged therein; that this proceeding is in the interest of the public; that the order proposed in said agreement is appropriate for the just disposition of all the issues in this proceeding as to all of the parties hereto; and that said order therefore should be, and hereby is entered as follows:

It i8 ordered That respondents Tropical Flo"erland, a corporation and its offcers, and Gcorge T. Rambaugh and Estelle M. Rambaugh individually and as offcers of said corporation, and respondents agents, representatives and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the offering for sale sale and distribution of orchids and other merchandise, and courses of instruction on the growing of orchids, orchid plants or nursery products in commerce, as "commerce" is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act, do forthwith cease and desist from: Representing, directly or by implication: 1. That any amount is the "wholesale price of merchandise unless it is the price let which the merchandise is usually and customarily sold at "wholesale;

2. That any profit can be made in the sale at retail by those purchasing merchandise from respondents unless the price paid to respondents is less than the usual and customary retail price of such merchandise.

298 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION DECISIO!\8 Complaint 58 F.

DECISION OF THE cO:)nnSSlO AND ORDER 'fO 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 7th day of Iarch, 1961, become the decision of the Commission; and accordingly:

It is ordered That the above-named respondents 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 manne-r and form in "which they Imve complied with the order to cease and desist.