Page images
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors]

commerce on or about February 1, 1943, by the Herman C. Fisher Co., from Orange, Calif.; and charging that it was adulterated in that it consisted in whole or in part of filthy substances.

On March 31, 1943, the Herman C. Fisher Co. of San Francisco, Calif., claimant, having admitted the allegations of the libel and having consented to the entry of a decree, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered released under bond for segregation and destruction of the unfit portion under the supervision of the Food and Drug Administration. 5075. Adulteration of walnut meats. U. S. v. 1 Case and 39 Cartons of Walnut Moats.

Decreos of condemnation. Ono lot ordered destroyed. The remaining lot ordered roloased under bond to be brought into compliance with the law. (F. D. C. Nos.

8618, 9826. Sample Nos. 12157-F, 42504-F.) On October 22, 1942, and April 22, 1943, the United States attorney for the Western District of Washington filed libels against 1 case and 39 cartons, each containing 25 pounds, of walnut meats at Seattle, Wash., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about July 31, 1942, and February 5, 1943, by Granton & Co. from Los Angeles, Calif.; and charging that it was adulterated in that it consisted in whole or in part of a filthy substance. The article was labeled in part: “Packed for Frederick & Nelson Seattle, Wash. Standard Ambergrade Shelled Walnuts,” or “California Light Amber Shelled Walnuts.”

On June 10, 1943, Frederick and Nelson Co. of Seattle, Wash., having appeared as claimant for the 39 cartons covered by one of the libels, and having consented to the entry of a decree, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered released under bond to be brought into compliance with the law under the supervision of the Food and Drug Administration. The unfit portion was segregated and denatured.

On July 13, 1943, no claimant having appeared for the one case, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered destroyed.

5076. Adulteration of walnut meats. U. S. v. 40 Cartons and 68 Cartons of Walnut Moats.

Consont decree of condemnation. (F. D. C. Nos. 9154, 9235. Sam Nos. 12461-F

12464-F, 13256-F.)
On January 12 and February 1, 1943, the United States attorney for the Western
District of Washington filed libels against a total of 108 cartons of walnut meats at
Seattle, Wash., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on
or about December 21 and 30, 1942, by. Morris Rosenberg from Los Angeles, Calif.;
and charging that it was adulterated in that it consisted in whole or in part of a
filthy and decomposed substance.

On May 17, 1943, Morris Rosenberg having appeared as claimant and having
consented to the entry of a decree, judgment of condemnation was entered and the
product_was ordered released under bond for reconditioning under the supervision
of the Food and Drug Administration. The good portion was separated from the
bad and the latter destroyed or denatured.
5077. Adulteration of pecan meats. U. S. v. 12 Cases of Pecan Meats. Default decree of

condomnation and destruction. (F. D. C. No. 9515. Sample No. 12945-F.)
On March 11, 1943, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of Wash:
ington filed a libel against 12 60-pound cases of walnut meats at Spokane, Wash.,
alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about June
13, 1942, by the L. R. Stone Co. from Los Angeles, Calif.; and charging that it was
adulterated in that it consisted wholly or in part of filthy substances. The article
was labeled in part: "Bargain Pecan Pieces."

On July 8, 1943, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered destroyed.

[ocr errors]

5078. Adulteration of pecan halves. U. S. v. 20 Cases of Pecan Halves. Consent decreo

of condemnation. Product ordered released under bond for reconditioning of the fit

portion and destruction of the unfit portion. (F. D. C. No. 9605. Sample No. 18533-F.) On March 24, 1943, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of New York filed a libel against 20 60-pound cases of pecan halves at Brooklyn, N. Y., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about March 4, 1943, by the Associated Pecan Co. from Valdosta, Ga., and charging that it was adulterated in that it consisted in whole or in part of a decomposed substance. The article was labeled in part: "No. 2 Pecan Halves * * * South Georgia Pecan Co. Valdosta, Ga.”

On May 5, 1943, A. Pearlman & Co., Inc., having appeared as claimant and having admitted the allegations of the libel and consented to the entry of a decree, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered released under bond for reconditioning by hand-picking and cleaning of the fit portion and destruction of the unfit portion, under the supervision of the Food and Drug Administration. 5079. Adulteration of chipped coconut. U. S. v. 40 Casos of Chipped Cocoanut. Decree of

condompation. Product ordered released under bond to be brought into compliance

with the law. (F. D. C. No. 9338. Sample No. 31777-F.) On February 8, 1943, the United States attorney for the Northern District of Ohio filed a libel against 40 130-pound cases of chipped coconut at Bryan, Ohio, alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about December 5, 1941, by the Stein Hall Manufacturing Co. from New York, N. Y.; and charging that it was adulterated in that it consisted in whole or in part of a filthy substance. The article was labeled in part; “McCord's Blue Bar Cocoanut Blue Bar Cocoanut Company Byron Ohio."

On March 2, 1943, the Spangler Candy Co., Bryan, Ohio, claimant, having admitted the allegations of the libel, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered released under bond to be brought into compliance with the law under the supervision of the Food and Drug Administration. 5080. Adulteration of shredded coconut. U. S. v. 15 Boxes of Shrodded Cocoanut. Decree

of condomnation. Product ordered roleased under bond to be brought into compliance

with the law. (F. D. C. No. 9337, Sample No. 31776-F.) On February 8, 1943, the United States attorney for the Northern District of Ohio filed a libel against 15 130-pound boxes of shredded coconut at Bryan, Ohio, alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about August 4, 1942, by the Braun Importing Co., Inc., from New York, N. Y.; and charging that it was adulterated in that it consisted in whole or in part of a filthy substance.

On March 2, 1943, the Spangler Candy Co., Bryan, Ohio, claimant, having admitted the material allegations of the libel, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered released under bond to be brought into compliance with the law under the supervision of the Food and Drug Administration.

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

5081. Adulteration and misbranding of poanuts. V. S. v. 6 Casos of Salted Peanuts. Detauli

docroo of condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. No. 9490. Sample No. 30874-F.) On March 6, 1943, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of Washington filed a libel against 6 cases, each containing 60 bags, of salted peanuts at Spokane, Wash., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about January 31, 1943, by the Reliable Nut Co. from Los Angeles, Calif.; and charging that it was adulterated and misbranded. The article was labeled in part: (Bags) "Royal Seal Fancy Salted Spanish Peanuts *** Vegetable Oil.”

The article was alleged to be adulterated in that salted peanuts containing mineral oil had been substituted wholly or in part for salted peanuts containing pure vegetable oil, which the article purported to be.

The article was alleged to be misbranded in that the statement, “Peanuts, Salt, Pure Vegetable Oil,” was false and misleading as applied to an article consisting of peanuts, salt, and mineral oil, a non-nutritive substance.

On May 3, 1943, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered destroyed. 5082. Adultoration of peanut butter. U. S. v. 86 Cases of Peanut Butter. Deļault decree of

condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. No. 9421. Sample No. 9446-F.) On February 23, 1943, the United States attorney for the Western District of Louisiana filed a libel against 86 cases, each containing 12 jars, of peanut butter at Monroe, La., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about December 10, 1942, by the Southland Products Co., from Jackson, Miss.; and charging that it was adulterated in that it consisted in whole or in part of a filthy substance, dirt. The article was labeled in part: (Jars) "Southland Brand Peanut Butter."

On April 8, 1943, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered destroyed or otherwise disposed of by the marshal, as provided by law.

5083. Adulteration and misbranding of peanut butter. U. S. v. 40 Cases of Peanut Butter

(and 3 additional soizuro actions against peanut butter). Default decrees of con.
demnation. Portion of product ordered delivered to a Federal insti!ution for use as
hog food; remaindor ordered destroyed. (F. D. C. Nos. 9341, 9342, 9827, 9945. Sample

Nos. 28451-F, 28452-F, 36064-F, 36111-F, 36113-F.)
This product contained dirt, and portions also contained rodent hairs, insect frag-
ments and grit.

On February 10 and May 31, 1943, the United States attorneys for the Southern District of Georgia and the District of Wyoming filed libels against 62 cases, each

or

case containing jars of various sizes, of peanut butter at Augusta, Ga., and 105 cases, each case containing jars of various sizes, of peanut butter at Rawlins, Wyo., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce within the period from on or about October 30, 1942, to January 8, 1943, by the Jaxon Foods, Inc., from Jacksonville, Fla.; and charging that it was adulterated and misbranded.

On April 21, 1943, the United States attorney for the District of Colorado filed a libel against 82 cases, each case containing jars of various sizes, of peanut butter at Denver, Colo., which had been shipped by the Jaxon Foods, Inc., of Jacksonville, Fla., alleging that the article had been shipped on or about June 27, 1942, from Jacksonville, Fla.; and charging that it was adulterated. The article was labeled in part : "Besmaid Peanut Butter * * *" "Meadow Lark Peanut Butter * * *." "Little Moore Brand 'Its Good Peanut Butter.” It was alleged to be adulterated in that it consisted in whole or in part of a filthy substance. The lot located at Augusta, Ga., was alleged to be adulterated further in that it had been prepared under insanitary conditions whereby it may have become contaminated with filth. The 12-ounce jars were alleged to be misbranded in that the statement appearing on the labeling, “Net Wt. 12 Ozs.," was false and misleading since it was short of the declared weight, and in that it was in package form and failed to bear a label containing an accurate statement of the quantity of the contents.

Between May 6 and August 5, 1943, no claimant having appeared, judgments of condemnation were entered and the lots located at Augusta, Ga., were ordered delivered to a Federal institution for use as hog feed, and the remaining lots were ordered destroyed. 5084. Misbranding of peanut buttor. U. S. v, The Goo. E. Pellens Company. Plea of nolo

contondori. Fino, $150. (F. D. C. No. 8806. Sample Nos. 4367-F, 4368-F, 4559-F,

4560-F.) On March 29, 1943, the United States attorney for the Southern District of Ohio filed an information against the Geo. E. Pellens Co., a corporation, at Cincinnati, Ohio, alleging shipment within the period from on or about September 15 to 25, 1942, from the State of Ohio into the States of Kentucky and Indiana of a quantity of peanut butter that was misbranded. The article was labeled in part: (Jars) "Rayo Peanut Butter * * * Net Wt. 8 Oz. (or "Contents 12 Oz." or "Contents 24 Oz."]."

The article was alleged to be misbranded in that the statements, “Net Wt. 8 Oz (or “Contents 12 Oz.," or "Contents 24 Oz."]," borne on the labels were false and misleading since the jars did not contain the amount declared, but did contain a smaller amount. It was alleged to be misbranded further in that it was a food in package form and its label did not bear an accurate statement of the quantity of the contents.

On July 27, 1943, a plea of nolo contendere having been entered on behalf of the defendant, the court imposed a fine of $150.

5085. Misbranding of poanut buttor. U. 8. v. 50 Cases of Peanut Butter. Consent decree of

condemnation. Product ordered reloased under bond for repackaging. (F. D. C.

No. 9365. Sample No. 18960-F.) This

product was short of the declared weight. On February 12, 1943, the United States attorney for the District of New Jersey filed a libel against 50 cases of peanut butter at Newark, N. J., alleging that the article had been_shipped in interstate commerce on or about December 19, 1942, by the H & M Packing Co., Inc., from Brooklyn, N. Y.; and charging that it was misbranded. The article was labeled in part: (Jars) "Champion Brand Peanut Butter Made from No. 1 Peanuts Net Wt. 12 oz.”

The article was alleged to be misbranded in that the statement, “Net. Wt. 12 oz.,' was false and misleading as applied to an article that was short weight, and in that it was in package form and failed to bear a label containing an accurate statement of the quantity of the contents.

On July 21, 1943, the H & M Packing Co., Inc., having appeared as claimant and having admitted the allegations of the libel and consented to the entry of a decree, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered released under bond for repackaging under the supervision of the Food and Drug Administration, so that each jar would contain 12 ounces, in compliance with the law. 5088. Mabranding of peanut buttor. U. S. v. 67 Cases of Peanut Buttor. Default decree of

condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. No. 9434. Sample No. 9731-F.) This product was short weight. On March 6, 1943, the United States attorney for the Southern District of Mississippi filed a libel against 67 cases of peanut butter, each containing 24 jars, at Gulfport, Miss., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about August 21, 1942, by the Dillon Candy Co., Inc., from Jacksonville, Fla.; and charging that it was misbranded. The article was labeled in part: (Jars) "Dubon Brand Net Wt. 6 Ozs. Peanut Butter * * * Distributed By Dubon Company New Orleans La.”

The article was alleged to be misbranded in that the statement "Net Wt. 6 Ozs.” was false and misleading as applied to an article which was shortweight, and in that it was in package form and failed to bear a label containing an accurate statement of the quantity of the contents.

On June 22, 1943, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered destroyed.

OILS AND FATS 5087. Adulteration and misbranding of oils. U. $. v. Frank Arminante (Rinascente Oil Co.).

Plea of not guilty. Trial by jury. Verdict of guilty. Sentenced to 3 weeks in jail on each of 6 counts, the sentences to run concurrenty. (F. D. C. No. 7288. Sample

Nos. 56658-E, 56676-E, 56677-E.) On March 31, 1943, the United States attorney for the Southern District of New York filed an information against Frank Arminante, trading as Rinascente Oil Co., at New York City, N. Y., alleging shipment and delivery for shipment within the period from on or about March 19 to May 20, 1941, from the State of New York into the State of Connecticut of quantities of oil that was adulterated and misbranded. Two of the shipments were labeled, respectively: “Italian Product Imported Virgin Olive Oil Super-Fine Brand Lucca Italy,” and “Extra Fine Oil Superfine Brand.” One shipment was labeled : "1 Gal."

The lot labeled “Olive Oil” was alleged to be adulterated in that an artificially flavored and artificially colored mixture of cottonseed oil and an oil similar to corn oil, containing little, if any, olive oil, had been substituted wholly or in part for olive oil, which it was represented to be. All lots of the oil were alleged to be adulterated (1) in that they werę imitations of olive oil, consisting essentially of artificially flavored and artificially colored mixtures of cottonseed oil or oils similar to corn oil or soy oil, and were inferior to olive oil, such inferiority having been concealed by the addition of artificial flavoring and artificial coloring; (2) in that artificial flavoring and artificial coloring had been added thereto or mixed or packed therewith so as to make it appear better and of greater value than it was; and (3) in that it contained a coal-tar color, Quinizarine Green, other than one from à batch that had been certified to in accordance with the regulations as provided by law.

All lots were alleged to be misbranded (1) in that they consisted of mixtures of oils containing little, if any, olive oil and were colored and flavored in imitation of olive oil, and their labels did not bear in type of uniform size and prominence the word "imitation" and immediately thereafter the name of the food imitated; (2) in that they were in package form and did not bear labels containing the name and place of business of the manufacturer, packer, or distributor; and (3) in that they were fabricated from two or more ingredients and their labels did not bear the the common or usual name of each such ingredient.

The portions labeled “Olive Oil" and "Fine Oil” were alleged to be misbranded further in that they contained artificial flavoring and artificial coloring and did not bear labeling stating those facts; and in that the words, statements, or other information required by or under authority of law to appear on the label or labeling were not placed thereon in such terms as to render them likely to be read and understood by the ordinary individual under customary conditions of purchase and use, since the tin label bore representations in the Italian language and, by reason of such representations, the article purported to be prepared for the Italian purchaser, and therefore the words, statements, and other information required by the act to appear on the label or labeling should appear thereon in the Italian language, in order to be read and understood by the Italian purchaser, whereas such statements and other information did not appear on the labeling in that language.

The lot labeled in part “Olive Oil” was alleged to be misbranded further (1) in that the statements, "Italian Product Imported Virgin Olive Oil * * * Lucca Italy. This Olive Oil is guaranteed to be absolutely pure under any chemical analysis. Recommended for table use and medical purposes. Imported Pure Olive Oil.," (and similar statements in Italian) together with the design of olive branches, leaves, and olives, appearing on the tins, were false and misleading as applied to a mixture of cottonseed oil and an oil similar to corn oil, containing little, if any, olive oil; and (2) in that the product consisted of a mixture of cottonseed oil and an oil similar to corn oil and contained little, if any, olive oil, and it was offered for sale under the name of another food, olive oil.

[ocr errors]

On April 6, 1943, the defendant having entered a plea of not guilty, the case was
tried to a jury on June 10, 14, and 15, 1943, and resulted in a verdict of guilty.
On July 9, 1943, the defendant was sentenced to 3 weeks on each of the 6 counts
of the information, the sentences to run concurrently.
5088. Misbranding of oil. V. S. v. 16 Cans and 18 Cans of Oil. Default decree of condemna.

tion. Product ordered delivered to a welfare organization. (F. D. C. No. 9767. Sam-

ple Nos. 26923-F, 26924-F.)
On or about April 12, 1943, the United States attorney for the District of New

Jersey filed a libel against 16 cans and 18 cans of oil at Plainfield, N. J., alleging

that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about March 2, 1943,

by Antonio and Peter Bottone, from New York, N. Y.; and charging that it was

misbranded. The article was labeled in part: "Net Contents One Gallon Marca

Risveglio Brand Extra Fine Oil," or "Finest Quality Purezza Brand * * * One

Gallon."

The article was alleged to be misbranded (1) in that the statements (Risveglia

Brand) “Net Contents One Gallon," and (Purezza Brand) "One Gallon” were

false and misleading as applied to the article, since it was short volume; (2) in

that it was in package form and failed to bear a label containing the name and place

of business of the manufacturer, packer, or distributor; (3) in that it failed to bear

a label containing an accurate statement of the quantity of the contents; (4) in that

it was fabricated from two or more ingredients and the label failed to bear the

common or usual name of each such ingredient; and (5) in that it contained arti-

ficial coloring and failed to bear labeling stating that fact.

On July 8, 1943, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemnation was

entered and the product was ordered delivered to a welfare organization.

5089. Adulteration and misbranding of mayonnaise. U. S. v. 15 Cases of Mayonnaise (and

7 additional seizure actions against mayonnaise). Detault decrees of condemna.

tion and destruction. (F. D. C. Nos. 9217, 9218, 9246, 9247, 9321, 9322, 9334, 9354.

Sample Nos. 19554-F, 22594-F, 23159-F, 23160-F, 23164-F, 23213-F, 23217-F, 23218-F.)
Between January 19 and February 10, 1943, the United States attorneys for the

Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the Middle District of Pennsylvania, and the

District of Massachusetts filed libels against 33 cases, each containing 4 1-gallon

jars, and 30 1-gallon jars of mayonnaise at Philadelphia, Pa.; 13 cases, each con-

taining 4 l-gallon jars, and 35 1-gallon jars, of mayonnaise at Allentown, Pa.;

6 cases, each containing 4 l-gallon jars and 3 1-gallon jars, of mayonnaise at

Wilkes-Barre, Pa.; 13 l-gallon jars of mayonnaise at Hazleton, Pa.; and 26

1-gallon jars of mayonnaise at Boston, Mass., alleging that the articles had been

shipped in interstate commerce within the period from on or about November 25

to December 19, 1942, by H. L. Barker, Inc., from New York, N. Y.; and charging
that it was adulterated and misbranded. The article was labeled in part: (Jars)
"Mayonnaise Quality Supreme Contains Vegetable Salad Oil."

The article was alleged to be adulterated (1) in that a valuable constituent,

vegetable oil, had been in whole or in part omitted therefrom; (2) in that a sub-

stance containing mineral oil had been substituted wholly or in part for mayonnaise,

which it purported and was represented to be; and (3) in that mineral oil, having

no food value, had been added to the article or mixed or packed therewith so as

to reduce its quality or strength.

The article was alleged to be misbranded (1) in that the statement "Mayonnaise

Quality Supreme *** Vegetable Salad Oil," appearing in the labeling, was false
and misleading as applied to an article made with mineral oil, a non-nutritive sub-
stance; (2) in that it was offered for sale under the name of another food; and (3)
in that it was in package form and failed to bear a label containing the name and
place of business of the manufacturer, packer, or distributor. A portion was alleged
to be misbranded further in that it failed to bear a label containing an accurate
statement of the quantity of the contents. One lot was alleged to be misbranded
further in that it was fabricated from two or more ingredients and its label failed
to bear the common or usual name of each ingredient since it contained egg whites,
which was not mentioned in the label.

Between February 8 and May 20, 1943, no claimant having appeared, judgments

of condemnation were entered and the product was ordered destroyed.

VITAMIN PREPARATIONS AND FOODS FOR

SPECIAL DIETARY USES

5090. Adulteration and misbranding of Dina-Mite Cereal. U. S. v. 25 Cans of Dina-Mite

Cereal. Default decree of condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. No. 9194. Sample

No. 12795-F.)
On January 25, 1943, the United States attorney for the District of Idaho filed a
libel against the above-named product at Twin Falls, Idaho, alleging that the article

« PreviousContinue »