Morgenstein Creations, Inc.

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

In Tas Martrer oF MORGENSTEIN CREATIONS, INC., ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE FUR PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket C-304. Complaint, Jan. 25, 1968—Decision, Jan. 25, 1963 Consent order requiring a New York City furrier to cease violating the Fur Products Labeling Act by failing to label fur products; failing to disclose on labels and invoices the true name of the animal producing the fur and when fur was secondhand; failing, on invoices, to show when fur products contained used fur and artificially colored fur, to use the term “natural” when required, and to show the name of the country of origin of imported furs, and using the term “blended” improperly; and failing in other respects to comply with requirements of the Act.

ComMPLAINT Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Fur Products Labeling Act and by virtue of the authority vested in it by said Acts, the Federal Trade Commission having rea- — son to believe that Morgenstein Creations, Inc., a corporation, and Morris Morgenstein, individually and as an officer 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:

Paracrapy 1. Respondent Morgenstein Creations, Inc., is a corporation organized, 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 312 Seventh Avenue, New York, N.Y. Individual respondent Morris Morgenstein is an officer 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.

Respondents are manufacturers of fur products. Par. 2. Subsequent to the effective date of the Fur Products Labeling Act on August 9, 1952, respondents have been and are now engaged in the introduction into commerce, and in the manufacture for introduction into commerce, and in the sale, advertising and offering for sale, in commerce, and in the transportation and distribution, in MORGENSTEIN CREATIONS, INC., BT AL. 99 98 : Complaint commerce, of fur products and have manufactured for sale, sold, advertised, offered for sale, transported and distributed fur products which have been made in whole or in part of fur which had been shipped and received in commerce as the terms “commerce”, “fur” and “fur product” are defined in the Fur Products Labeling Act. Par. 8. Certain of said fur products were misbranded in that they were not labeled as required under the provisions of Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and in the manner and form prescribed by the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder. Among such misbranded fur products but not limited thereto were fur products without labels and fur products with labels which failed to disclose the truename of the animal that produced the fur. Par. 4. Certain of said fur products were misbranded in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act in that they were not labeled in accordance with the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in the following respects:

(a) Information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder was set forth in abbreviated form, in violation of Rule 4 of said Rules and Regulations.

(b) The term “secondhand” was not used to designate fur products when such fur products had been used or worn by ultimate consumers and subsequently marketed in their original reconditioned, or rebuilt form with or without the addition of any furs or used furs, in violation of Rule 23 of said Rules and Regulations. ; (c) Information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder was not set forth in the required sequence, in violation of Rule 30 of said Rules and Regulations.

Par. 5. Certain of said fur products 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 in the manner and form prescribed by the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder.

Among such falsely and deceptively invoiced fur products but not limited thereto were fur products covered by invoices which failed: (a) To show the true animal name of the fur used in the fur product.

(b) To show that the fur product contained or was composed of - used fur, when such was the fact.

(c) To disclose that fur products contained or were composed of bleached, dyed or otherwise artificially colored fur when such fur products were bleached, dyed or otherwise artificially colored. Decision and Order 62 F.T.C.

(d) To show the name of the country of origin of the imported furs contained in fur products.

Par. 6. Certain of said fur products 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 the following respects: (a) Information required under Section 5(b)(1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder was set forth in abbreviated form, in violation of Rule 4 of said Rules and Regulations.

(b) The term “blended” was used as part of the information required under Section 5(b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder to describe the pointing, bleaching, dyeing, tip-dyeing or otherwise artificial coloring of furs, in violation of Rule 19(f) of said Rules and Regulations. (c) Fur products were not described as natural when such fur products were not pointed, bleached, dyed or otherwise artificially colored, in violation of Rule 19(g) of said Rules and Regulations. (d) The term “secondhand” was not used to designate fur products when such fur products have been used or worn by ultimate consumers and subsequently marketed in their original, reconditioned or rebuilt form with or without the addition of any furs or used furs, in violation of Rule 23 of said Rules and Regulations. (e) Required item numbers were not set forth on invoices, in violation of Rule 40 of said Rules and Regulations. Par. 7. The aforesaid acts and practices of respondents, as herein alleged, are in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder and constitute unfair and deceptive acts and practices and unfair methods of competition 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 The respondents and counsel for the Commission having thereafter executed an agreement containing a consent order, an admission by 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 re- MORGENSTEIN CREATIONS, INC., ET AL. 101 98 Order spondents that the law has been violated as set forth in such complaint, and waivers and provisions as required by the Commission’s rules; and The Commission, having considered the agreement, hereby accepts same, issues its complaint in the form contemplated by said agreement, makes the following jurisdictional findings, and enters the following order:

1. Respondent Morgenstein Creations, Inc., is a corporation organized, 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 312 Seventh Avenue, New York, New York. Respondent Morris Morgenstein is an officer 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 Morgenstein Creations, Inc., a corporation, and its officers, and Morris Morgenstein, individually ‘and as an officer of said corporation, and respondents’ representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, i in connection with the introduction, or manufacture for introduction into commerce, or the sale, advertising or offering for sale in commerce, or the transportation or distribution in commerce of fur products or in connection with the sale, manufacture for sale, advertising, offering for sale, transportation or distribution of fur products which have been 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: 1. Misbranding fur products by:

(a) Failing to affix labels to fur products showing in words and figures plainly legible all the information required to be disclosed by each of the subsections of Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act.

(b) Setting forth on labels affixed to fur products information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in abbreviated form.

(c) Failing to disclose on labels affixed to fur products that fur products are “secondhand” when such fur products have been used or worn by ultimate consumers and subsequently marketed in their original, reconditioned or rebuilt form with or without the addition of any furs or used furs. 749-537—67——8& Syllabus . 62 F.T.C.

(d) Failing to set forth on labels affixed to fur products the information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in the required sequence.

2. Falsely or deceptively invoicing fur products by: (a) Failing to furnish invoices to purchasers of fur products 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. (b) 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.

(c) Setting forth the term “blended” as part of the information required under Section 5(b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder to describe the pointing, bleaching, dyeing, tipdyeing, or otherwise artificial coloring of furs. (d) Failing to describe. fur products as natural when such fur products are not pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed or otherwise artificially colored.

(e) Failing to disclose that fur products are “secondhand” when such fur products have been.used or worn by ultimate consumers and subsequently marketed in their original, reconditioned, or rebuilt form with or without the addition of any furs or used furs.

(f) Failing to set forth the item number or mark assigned to a fur product.

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 in which they have complied with this order.