Miami Menstogs, Inc

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

IN THE MATTER OF MIAMI MENSTOGS, INC., ET AL.

CONSENT ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND TEXTILE FIBER PRODUCTS IDENTIFICATION ACTS Docket C-2555. Complaint, Oct. 3, 1974—Decision, Oct. 3, 1974 Consent order requiring a Hialeah, Fla., manufacturer of men’s sport shirts, among other things to cease misbranding its textile fiber products and failing to maintain required records. :

Appearances For the Commission: Truett M. Honeycutt.

For the respondents: Pro se.

COMPLAINT Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act, and the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act, and by virtue of the authority vested in it by said Acts, the Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that Miami Menstogs, Inc., a corporation, and Henry Young, individually and as an officer of Miami Menstogs, Inc., hereinafter referred to as respondents, have violated the provisions of said Acts and the rules and regulations promulgated under the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act, and it now appearing to the Commission that a proceeding by it in respect thereto would be in the public interest, hereby issues its complaint stating its charges in that respect as follows:

PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent Miami Menstogs, Inc., is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Florida. The respondent corporation maintains its general offices and principal place of business at 890 West 84th St. Hialeah, Fla.

Respondent Henry Young is an officer of the corporate respondent. He formulates, clirects and controls the acts and practices of the corporate respondent including those hereinafter referred to. His address is the same as that of the corporate respondent. Respondents are engaged in the business of manufacturing men’s sport shirts.

Par. 2. Respondents are now and for some time last past have been, engaged in the introduction, delivery for introduction, sale, advertising, 5x2 Complaint and offering for sale in commerce, and in the transportation or causing to be transported in commerce, of textile fiber products; and have sold, offered for sale, advertised, delivered, transported, and caused to be transported after shipment in commerce, textile fiber products, either in their original state or contained in other textile fiber products, as the terms “commerce” and “textile fiber product” are defined in the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act.

Par. 3. Certain of said textile fiber products were misbranded by respondents within the intent and meaning of Section 4(a) of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder, in that they were falsely and deceptively stamped, tagged, labeled, invoiced, advertised or otherwise identified as to the name and amount of the constituent fibers contained therein. Among such misbranded textile fiber products, but not limited thereto, were men’s sports shirts which contained substantially different amounts and types of fibers than as represented. Par. 4. Certain of said textile fiber products were misbranded by respondents 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 Act, 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 thereto, were textile fiber products, namely men’s shirts with labels . which failed:

1. To disclose the true generic names of the fibers present; and 2. To disclose the percentage of said fibers present, by weight. Par. 5. Certain of said textile fiber products were misbranded in violation of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act in that they were not labeled in accordance with the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder in the following respects: 1. The required information as to fiber content was not set forth in such manner as to separately show the fiber content of each section of the textile fiber products containing two or more sections, in violation of rule 25(b) of the aforesaid rules and regulations. 2. The required information as to fiber content was abbreviated in violation of Rule d(a) of the aforesaid rules and regulations. Par. 6. Respondents have failed to maintain and preserve proper records showing the fiber content of textile fiber products manufactured by them in violation of Section 6(a) of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act and Rule 39 of the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder.

575-956 O-LT - 76 - 38 asd FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION DECISIONS Decision and Order 84 F.T.C.

Par. 7. The acts and practices of respondents as set forth above were, and are, in violation of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder, 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 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 Atlanta Regional Office 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 respondents and counsel for the Commission having thereafter executed an agreement containing a consent order, an admission by the respondents 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 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 Act, 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 sixty (60) days, now in further conformity with the procedure prescribed in Section 2.34(b) of its rules, the Commission hereby issues its complaint, makes the following jurisdictional finding, and enters the following order:

1. Respondent Miami Menstogs is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Florida, with its office and principal place of business located at 890 West 84th St. Hialeah, Fla.

Respondent Henry Young is an officer of said corporation. He formulates, directs and controls the policies, acts and practices of said corporation, and his principal office and place of business is located at the above stated address.

2. The Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction of the subject wn ee ey ney ae cae vou HS2 Decision and Order matter of this proceeding and of the respondents, and the proceeding is in the public interest.

ORDER It is ordered, That respondents Miami Menstogs, Inc., a corporation, ‘its successors and assigns, and Henry Young, individually and as an officer of said corporation and respondents’ representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporation, subsidiary, division or other device, in connection with the introduction, delivery for introduction, manufacture for introduction, sale, advertising, or offering for sale, in commerce, or the importation into the United States, of any textile fiber product; or in connection with the sale, offering for sale, advertising, delivery, transportation or causing to be 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 “commerce” and “textile fiber product” are defined in the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act, do forthwith cease and desist from: A. Misbranding textile fiber products by:

1. Falsely or deceptively stamping, tagging, labeling, invoicing or otherwise identifying such products as to the name or amount of the constituent fibers contained therein. 2. Failing to affix a stamp, tag, label or other means of identification to each such product showing in a clear, legible and conspicuous manner each element of information required to be disclosed by Section 4(b) of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act.

3. Failing to separately set forth the required information as to fiber content in such a manner as to show the fiber content of the separate sections of textile fiber products containing two or more sections which are of different fiber composition where such form of marking is necessary to avoid deception as required by Rule 25(b) of the rules and regulations promulgated under authority of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act.

4. Setting forth information required under Section 4(a) of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act and P ile 5(a) promulgated thereunder in abbreviated form on labels affixed to textile products.

B. Failing to maintain and preserve proper records of fiber content of textile fiber products manufactured by respondents as required by Section 6(a) of the Textile Fiber Products Identifica- Decision and Order . 84 F.T.C.

tion Act and Rule 39 of the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder.

It is further ordered, That respondents notify the Commission at least thirty (80) days prior to any proposed change in the corporate respondent, Miami: Menstogs, Inc., such as dissolution, assignment or sale resulting in the emergence of a successor corporation, the creation or dissolution of subsidiaries or any other change in the corporation which may affect compliance obligations arising out of the order. It is further ordered, That the individual respondent named herein promptly notify the Commission of the discontinuance of his present business or employment and of his affiliation with a new business or employment. Such notice shall include respondent’s current business address and a statement as to the nature of the business or employment in which he is engaged as well as a description of his duties and responsibilities.

It is further ordered, That the respondent. corporation shall forthwith distribute a copy of this order to each of its operating divisions. 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.