Magellan Corporation

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

IN THE :MA'ITER OF 1\iAGELLAN CORPORATION ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COl\HrIISSION AND THE TEXTILE FIBER PRODUCTS IDENTI- Fication ACTS Docket 0-1300. Complaint, Feb. 1968-Decisi. , Feb. 26, 1968 Consent order requiring a New York City firm of hosiery importers to cease misrepresenting the origin of its merchandise and misbranding its textle fiber products.

COMPLAINT Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Aet and the Textile Fiber Products Identifieation Act, and by virtue of the authority vested in it by said Acts, the Federal Trade Commission having reason to believe that Magellan Corporation, a corporation, and Jack R. Cooper, individually and as a former offieer of said corporation, hereinafter referred to as respondents, have violated the provisions of said Acts and the Rules and Regulations promulgated under MAGELLAN CORPORATION ET AL. 445 444 Complaint the Textile Fiber Produds Identification Aet, 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 ~fageIlan Corporation is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York.

Respondent J aek R. Cooper formerly was an officer of the corporate respondent. During the time Jack R. Cooper was an 'Offieer of said firm, he formulated, directed and controlled the ads, practices and policies of said corporate respondent, including the acts and practices hereinafter set forth.

Respondents are hosiery importers with their former office and principal place of business located at 350 Fifth Avenue, New York, New York.

PAR. 2. Respondents are now, and for some time last past, have been engaged in the introduction, delivery for introduction, sale, advertising, and offering for sale, in commerce, and in the transportation or causing to be transported in commerce, and the importation into the United States, of textile fiber product.s; and have sold, offered for sale advertised, delivered, transported and caused to be transported, textile fiber products, which have been advertised or offered for sale in eommerce; and have sold, offered for sale, advertised, delivered, transported and caused to be transported, after shipment in commerce, textile fiber products, e.ither in their original state or contained,c1 in other.r textile fiber products; as the terms "commerce" and "textile fiber product" are defined in the Textile Fiber Products Identifieation Act. PAR. 3. Certain of said textile fiber products, were misbranded in that they were not stamped, tagged, labeled or otherwise identified as required under the provisions of Section 4 (b) of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Aet, and in the manner and form as prescribed by the Rules and Regulations promulgated under said Act. Among such misbranded textile fiber products, but not limited there- , were textile fiber products with labels which failed to disclose the name of the country where imported produds were processed or manufactured.

PAR. 4. Certain of said textile fiber products were misbranded by the respondents, in violation of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Ad in that they were not labeled in accordanee with the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in that nonrequired information was set forth on labels in such a manner as to interfere with, minimize Decision and Order 73 F.

detraet from, and conflict with information required by Section 4 (b) of the Textile Fiber Products Identifieation Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder, in violation of Rule 16 (e) of the aforesaid Rules and Regulations.

PAR. 5. The acts and practices of the respondents as set forth above were, and are, in violation of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Aet and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder, and eonstituted, and now constitute, unfair methods of competition and unfair and deceptive acts and practices in eommeree, within the intent and meaning of the Federa.l Trade Co1TIll1ission Act. PAR. G. Respondents are now, and for some time last past have been engaged in the offering for sale, sale .and distribution of products, namely ladies' hosiery to the public. The respondents ' said business is that of importing ladies' hosiery from sources in Yugoslavia, and selling said hosiery to the public throughout the United States. The respondents maintain, and for all times mentioned herein have maintained a substantial course of trade in said products in commerce, as commerce" is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Aet. PAR. 7. Certain of said ladies' hosiery offered for sale and sold by respondents bore labels and marks misrepresenting the country of origin of such products. Among such ladies' hosiery, but not limited thereto, were hosiery to which were affixed labels that stated "M::ade in Italy.

Through the aforesaid labels respondents represented, eontrary to fact, that such products were of Italian origin. PAR. 8. The acts and praetiees of the respondents set out above were and are, all to the prejudice and injury of the public and constituted and now constitute, unfair and deceptive acts and praetiees in commerce in violation of Section 5 of the Federa.l Tra.de Comnlission Aet. 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 copy of a draft of complaint which the Bureau of TeA'iiles and Furs 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 and the Textile Fiber Products Identifieation Aet; and The respondents and counsel for the Commission having thereafte, exeented an agreement containing a eonsent order, an admission by MAGELLAN CORPORATION ET AL. 447 Decision and Orderthe444respondents 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 constitute an admission by respondents that the law has been violated as alleged in such complaint, and "ai vels and other provisions as required by the Commissions Rules; and The Comnlission 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 charge.s in that respect, and having thereupon accepted the executed eonsent agreement and placed such agreement on the public record for a period of thirty (30) days, now in further eonformity with the procedure pre.seribed in S 2.34 (b) of its Rules, the Commission hereby issues its complaint, Inakes the following jurisdictional findings, and enters the following order:

1. Respondent l\lagellan Corporation is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York. Said firm was sold in November 1966. Respondent Jack R. Cooper formerly was an offieer of said corporation lmtil November 1966 when said corporation was sold. Respondents' former office and principal place of business was located at 350 Fifth Avenue, New York, New York. 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 t is 01'dered That respondents l\lagellan Corporation, a corporation, and its officers, and Jack n. Cooper, individually and formerly as an offieer of said corporation, and respondents' representatives agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in eonneetion with the introduction, delivery for introduction sale, advertising, or offering for sale in commerce, or the transportation or c.ausing to be transported in commerce, or the importation into the United States of textile fiber products; or in connection with the sale, offering for sale, advertising, deEvery, transportation or causing to be transported, of any textile fiber products, "which have been advertised or offered for sale in commerce; or in connection with the sale offering for sale, advertising, delivery, transportation or causing to transported, after shipment in commerce of any textile fiber product whether in its original state or contained in other textile fiber products as the terms "eommeree" and "textile fiber product" are defined in the .\, Complaint 73 F.

Textile Fiber Products Identifieation Act, do forthwith cease and desist from:

A. "ThIisbranding textile fiber products by: 1. Failing to affix labels to such textile fiber products showing in a. clear, legible and eonspieuous manner each element of information required to be disclosed by Section 4 (b) of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act.

2. Setting forth on labels nonrequired information that interferes with, minimizes, detracts from, or confliets with the required information.

I t is fu,rther ordered That respondents :Magellan Corporation, a corporation, and its officers, and J aek R. Cooper, individually and formerly as an officer of said corporation, and respondents' representa-. tives agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the offering for sale, sale, or distribution of imported ladies' hosiery or other products, in commerce, as "commerce" is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act, do forthwith cease and desist from misrepresenting on labels the nan1e of the country where such hosiery or other products "ere processed or manufactured. i.s fu.rthe1' orde'l'ecl 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