Samuel Starobin, Inc.

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

IN THE fatter OF SAML'EL STAROBIN , INC., ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER, ETC. , IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF' THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE WOOL PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket 1461. Complaint, Dec. 196B-Decision, Dec. , 1968 Consent order requiring a New York City manufacturer of coats to cease misbranding and falsely guaranteeing its wool products. COMPLAINT Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939 and by virtue of the authority vested in it by said Acts, the Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that Samuel Starobin, Inc. a corporation, and Samuel Starobin and Martin W. Lyons, individually and as oflcers of the aforesaid corporation, sometimes hereinafter referred to as respondents, have violated the provisions of said Acts and the Rules and Regulations promulgated under the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939 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 Samuel Starobin, Inc. , is a corporation organized, existing, and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York.

Respondents Samuel Starobin and Martin W. Lyons are offcers of the corporate respondent. They formulate, direct and control the acts, practices and policies of the corporate respondent including the acts, practices and policies hereinafter set forth. Samuel Starobin and Martin W. Lyons have their oflce and principal place of business at 265 West 37th Street, New York New York.

Respondents are engaged in the manufacture and sale of coats with their principal offce and place of business located at 265 West 37th Street, :\ew York, New York.

PAR. 2. Respondents, now and for some time last past, have manufactured for introduction into commerce, introduced into commerce, sold, transported, distributed, delivered for shipment isshipped, and offered for sale, in commerce, as "commerce" defined in the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939, wool products as "wool product" is defined therein.

PAR. 3. Certain of said wool products were misbranded by the SAMUEL STAROBlN, INC., ET AL. 1439 1438 Complaint respondents within the intent and meaning of Section 4 (a) (1) of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939 and Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder, in that they were falsely and deceptively stamped, tagged, labeled, or otherwise identified with respect to the character and amount of the constituent fibers contained therein.

Among such misbranded wool products, but not limited thereto were wool products which were stamped, tagged, labeled, or otherwise identified by respondents as 100 percent Wool, whereas in truth and in fact, said products contained substantially different fibers and amounts of fibers than represented. PAR. 4. Certain of said wool products were further misbranded by respondents in that they were not stamped, tagged, labeled, or otherwise identified as required under the provisions of Section 4 (a) (2) of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939 and in the manner and form as prescribed by the Rules and Regulations promulgated under said Act.

Among such misbranded wool products, but not limited thereto were woolen coats with labels on or affxed thereto which failed to disclose the percentage of the total weight of the said wool product, exclusive of ornamentation not exceeding 5 per centum of the total fiber weight, of (1) wool; (2) reprocessed wool; (3) reused wool; (4) each fiber other than wool, when said percentage by weight of such was 5 per centum or more; and (5) the aggregate of all other fibers.

PAR. 5. Certain of said wool products were misbranded by respondents in violation of the Wool Products Labeling Act of and1939 inRegulationsthat they werepromulgatednot labeledthereunderin accordancein withthe thefollowingRules respects:

A. Certain wool products composed of two or more sections of different fiber composition, were not labeled in such a manner as to disclose the fiber composition of each section and such form of marking was necessary to avoid deception in violation of Rule 23 (b) of the aforesaid Rules and Regulations. B. The fiber content of interlinings incorporated into garments, namely woolen coats was not set forth separately and distinctly as part of the required information on the stamp, tag, label or other mark of identification affxed to sllch wool products, in violation of Rule 24 (b) of the aforesaid Rules and Regulations.

PAR. 6. Respondents furnished false guaranties by falsely Decision and Order 74 F. representing that they had a continuing guaranty on file with the Federal Trade Commission, in violation of Rule 33 (d) of the aforesaid Rules and Regulations and Section 9 (b) of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939.

PAR. 7. The acts and practices of the respondents as set forth above were and are in violation of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939 and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder, and constituted and now constitute unfair methods of competition and unfair and deceptive acts and practices, in commerce, within the intent and meaning of the Federal Trade Commission Act.

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 a copy of a draft of complaint which the Bureau of Textiles 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 Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939; and The respondents and counsel for the Commission having thereafter executed an agreement containing a consent order, an admission by the respondents of an the jurisdictional facts set forth in the aforesaid draft of complaint, a statement that the signing of said agreement is for settement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by respondents that the law has been violated as alleged in such complaint, and waivers and other provisions as required by the Commission s Rules; and The Commission 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 charges in that respect, and having thereupon accepted the executed consent agreement and placed such agreement on the public record for a period of thirty (30) days, now in further conformity with the procedure prescribed in 9 2.34 (b) of its Rules, the Commission hereby issues its complaint, makes the following jurisdictional findings, and enters the following order: 1. Respondent Samuel Starobin, Inc. , is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of thc State of New York, with its offce and principal place of business located at 265 West 37th Street, N ew York New York.

SAMUEL STAROBIN, INC. , ET AL. 1441 1438 Decision and Ortier Respondents Samuel Starobin and Martin W. Lyons are offcers of said corporation and their 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 respondents Samuel Starobin, Inc., a corporation, and its offcers, and Samuel Starobin and Martin W. Lyons, individually and as offcers of said corporation, and respond ents' representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the introduction or manufacture for introduction, into commerce, or the offering for sale, sale, transportation, distribution, delivery for shipment or shipment, in commerce, of wool products as "commerce" and wool product" are defined in the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939, do forthwith cease and desist from misbranding such products by:

1. Falsely and deceptively stamping, tagging, labeling, or otherwise identifying such products as to the character or amount of the constituent fibers contained therein. 2. Failing to securely affx to, or place on, each such product a stamp, tag, label, or other means of identification shovdng in a clear and conspicuous manner each element of information required to be disclosed by Section 4 (a) (2) of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939. 3. Failing to set forth required information on labels attached to wool products consisting of two or more sections of different fiber content, in such a manner as to show the fiber content of each section in all instances where such marking is necessary to avoid deception. 4. Failing to set forth separately and distinctly as part of the required information on the stamp, tag, label or other mark of identification of wool products the fiber content of interlinings.

It is further ordered That respondents Samuel Starobin, Inc., a corporation, and its offcers, and Samuel Starobin and :'vartin W. Lyons, individually and as offcers of said corporation, and respondents ' representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, do forthwith cease and desist from furnishing a false guaranty that any wool product 1442 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION DECISIOXS Complaint 74 F.

is not misbranded, when the respondents have reason to believe that such wool product may be introduced, sold, transported or distributed in commerce.

It is t"rther Qt'dated That the respondent corporation shan forthwith distribute a copy of this Order to each of its operating divisions.

It is tw.ther 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.