Porter & Dietsch, Inc

Volume 86 · 86 F.T.C. 1570

Citation: 86 F.T.C. 1570
Docket: 9047
Decision: 1975-12-19
Document type: other
Case type: consumer protection
Industry: weight reducing drugs
Outcome: other
Commission counsel: Dean A. Fournier, Alan H. Melnicoe and William H. Patton
Respondent counsel: Albert A. Carretta, Browne, Beveridge DeGrandi and Kline Wash., D.C. for Porter & Dietsch. For Pay Save Corporation pro se
Source: Original volume PDF
Original PDF: This decision as a PDF

Cite this decision

Porter & Dietsch, Inc, 86 F.T.C. 1570 (1975). Consumer Law Library, https://consumerlawlibrary.org/decisions/v086-0176

Report an error in this record (decision id v086-0176)

Order status: unknown. Sunset may be extended by the latest qualifying federal-court complaint alleging an order violation; complaints, dismissal/appeal outcomes, and respondent-specific extensions are not fully tracked.

Cited by 0 later FTC decisions

Cites

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

IN THE MATIER OF PORTER & DIETSCH, INC., ET AL.

Docket 9047. Order, Dec. , 1975 Denial of motion for issuance of supplementary corrective news relea.'o;e, Appearances For the Commission: Dean A. Fournier, Alan H. Melnicoe and William H. Patton.

For the respondents: Albert A. Carretta, Browne, Beveridge DeGrandi and Kline Wash., D.C. for Porter & Dietsch. For Pay Save Corporation pro se.

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR ISSUANCE OF SUPPLEMENTARY CORRECTIVE NEWS RELEASE This matter is before us on the motion of respondents Porter & Dietsch, Inc., William H. Fraser, Kelly Ketting Furth, Inc., and Joseph Furth, requesting the issuance of a "supplementary corrective news release." The administrative law judge certified the motion to the Commission on Dec. 4, 1975, together with his recommendation that the motion be denied.

The news release published by the Offce of Public Information on Aug. 27, 1975, failed to include the usual caveat that the Commission issues a complaint when it "has reason to believe" that the law has been violated and a proceeding is in the public interest, and that the issuance of a complaint simply marks the beginning of a formal proceeding in which the allegations wil be ruled upon after a public hearing. On Oct. , 1975, the Commission issued an order (86 F. C. 896) granting respondents' prior motion seeking the issuance of a corrective news release. The corrective release issued on Oct. 14, 1975. Respondents now claim that the corrective release was insuffcient and that stil another release should issue. They ask that the supplementary release include inter alia a more elaborate caveat and state that the news release issued by the Seattle Regional Offce on Aug. 27, 1975, improperly listed the names of eight drug chains other than respondent Pay N' Save selling the " ll Reducing Plan. Respondents' rights were not violated by the press releases issued on Aug. 27, 1975 and Oct. 14, 1975. Accordingly, It is ordered That the aforesaid motion be, and it hereby is, denied. 1571 Complaint

← 86 F.T.C. 1569 · 86 F.T.C. 1571 →