Notices of judgment under the Federal insecticide, fungicide, and rodenticide act

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Notices of judgment under the Federal insecticide, fungicide, and rodenticide act
Physical Description:
v. : ; 23 cm.
Language:
English
Creator:
United States -- Agricultural Research Service
United States -- Plant Pest Control Branch
United States -- Plant Pest Control Division
United States -- Agricultural Research Service. -- Pesticides Regulation Division
Publisher:
The Service
Place of Publication:
Washington, D.C
Publication Date:
Frequency:
irregular
completely irregular

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Pesticides -- Law and legislation -- United States   ( lcsh )
Genre:
serial   ( sobekcm )
law report or digest   ( marcgt )
federal government publication   ( marcgt )

Notes

Dates or Sequential Designation:
Nos. 170-200 (issued Apr. 1954)-
Dates or Sequential Designation:
Ceased with June 1970 issue: Nos. 869-919.
Issuing Body:
Issued 1954-1957 by the service's Plant Pest Control Branch; 1958-Feb. 1962 by the service's Plant Pest Control Division; Sept. 1962-<Sept. 1965> by the service's Pesticides Regulation Division.
General Note:
Title from caption.
Statement of Responsibility:
United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, ...

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
aleph - 004700307
oclc - 01780408
lccn - sn 98047303
System ID:
AA00008500:00006

Related Items

Preceded by:
Notices of judgment under the Federal insecticide, fungidide, and rodenticide act
Succeeded by:
Notices of judgment under the Federal insecticide, fungicide and rodenticide act

Full Text
ar 7
31')*JJl--


N.J., I.F.R. 301-316


Issued April 1961


UNITED


STATES


DEPARTMENT


OF


AGRICULTURE


AGRICULTURAL


RESEARCH


SERVICE


PLANT PEST CONTROL DIVISION


NOTICES


JUDGMENT
FUNGICIDE.


UNDER THE FEDERAL INSECTICIDE.
AND RODENTICIDE ACT


Nos.


301-316


The following notices of judgment relate to cases arising in the United States
District Courts and are approved for publication as provided in section 6 of the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 135d).
M. R. CLARKSON,
Acting Administrator, Agricultural Research Service.
WASHINGTON, D.C., December 29, 1960


Lack of registration and
"HARI-KARI LIN DAN
"NEODANE PELLET
SILICA AEROGEL."
KARI LINDANE VAP
of "NEODANE PELLE
of "HARI-KARI SILIC


and release under bond.
36154.)


required information on li
E VAPORIZING UNITS;'
S;" and lack of register
U.S. v. 131 containers, m
ORIZING UNITS;" 138 cc
,TS;" and 570 two-ounce c
A AEROGEL." Consent


(I.F. & R. No. 344.


The "HARI-KARI LINDANE VAPORIZING UNIT
under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodentici
tion showed that the labels on the containers did not ben
weight or measure of the contents of the containers and
as required by the act. The products, "NEODANE P
KARI SILICA AEROGEL," were not registered under
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.
On February 17, 1960, the United States Attorney for
Missouri, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agri
trict Court a libel, praying seizure for condemnation
containers, more or less, of "HARI-KARI VAPORIZIN4
ers, more or less, of "NEODANE PELLETS"; a,
more or less, of "HARI-KARI SILICA AEROC".
alleging that the products were economic po lec
interstate on or about October 20, 1958, an mber
Company, from Torrence, Calif., in violations act.
It was alleged that the products were registered
Agriculture as required by section 4 of the
It was alleged that the "HARI-KARI DANE
**~lf *~*nn-nS n n n -n* f*hSE- A.nA tU ..


ibel and
' lack of
action of
ore or 1l
containers
ontaineru
decree ol


I.D. Nos. 36152,


S,"
de
Ir
an
EL
thi

thl
cul
an


were not
Act, and an
i statement
ingredient
,LETS," an
e Federal I


e
t
d


misbranding of
registration of
S"HARI-KARI
ess, of "HARI-
;, more or less,
s, more or less,
F condemnation


36153, and

registered
Sexamina-
of the net
statement
d "HARI-
nsecticide,

District of
n the Dis-
ion of 131
18 contain-
.ontainers,
, Mo., and
*ansported
e Neodane

etary of

NITS,"
J.g .


* Western ]
ure, filed i
confiscate
NITS"; 13
i unce c
a f ity
ac~keerti


.ri e-- n*St4


I


i






236


INSECTICIDE,


FUNGICIDE,


AND


RODENTICIDE


ACT


[I.F.R.N.J..


The Neodane Company, of Torrence, Calif., claimed ownership of the products,
requested their release up$ bnd, f. pumsu
pliine with the act, and consented to the entry of a condemnation de-re.
Seteptber 7, 1960, a decree of condemn tion was enters aniit as
that the products be released to the claimant under bond.


Lack o
of "]
trati
of "
mort
tion,
and


Cf registration and required information on labe
SIARI-KARI LINDANE VAPORIZING UNITS-;"
on of "NEODANE PELLETS." U.S. v. 23 contain
HARI-KARI LINDANE VAPORIZING UNITS;"
i or less, of "NEODANE PELLETS." Default de
forfeiture, and destruction. (LF. & It. No. 3i
36160.)


I and misbranding
and lack of regis-
ners, more or less,
and 66 containers,
cree of condemna-
.LD. Mso 3615W
'.;~ .iuuiiim


The "HfARI-KARI LINDA VAPORIZING UNITS" were not register
under the Federal Ineticide, FIagicide, and Rodenticide Act, and an exami-
nation showed that the labels on the containers did not bear a statement of the
net weight or measure of the contents of the containers and an ingredient state-
ment as required by the act The product, "NEODANE PELLETS," was not
registered under the Federal banetieide, Fingicide, and Rodenticide Act.
On March 26, 1960, the United States Attorney for the District of Kansas,
acting upon a report by the Secrteary of Agriculture, filed in the District Court
a libel, praying seizure for condemnation and confiscation of 23 containers, more
or less, of "HARI-KARI VAPORIZING UNITS ;" and 66 containers, more or r
less, of "NEODANE PELLETS" at Kansas City, Kans., and alleging that the
products were economic poisons which had been transported interstate on or .
about January 13, 1960) by J. H. Smith Company, from Kansas City, Mo., in
violation of the act. .:
It was alleged that the products were not registered with the Secretary of .|
Agriculture as required by section 4 of the act,
It was alleged that the "HARI-KARI LANDANE VAPORIZING UNITS," ..
were misbranded in that their labels did not bear ingredient statements giving
the name and percentage of each of the active ingredients, together with the .
total percentage of the inert ingredients, or ingredit statement
names of each of the active and each of the inert ingredients in the descending
order of the percentage of each present in each classification, together with the
total percentage of the inert ingredients.
It was further alleged that the "HARI-KARI LINDANE VAPORIZING
UNITS," were in violation of the act in that their labels did not bear statements
of the net weight or measure of the contents.
On June 28, 1960, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation and
forfeiture was entered, and it was ordered that the products be destroyed.


303S Lack of registration
PROOFER" U.S.
FABRIC WATER
ture, and destruct
TPhe product, "FARSPE
under the Wederal Insec
tion of the product shove
ingredient statement
On June 6, 1960, 4he
acting upon a report by.t
a libel, praying seitu re fo
_- -- jr-1e9 n -ih/s


I and misbranding of "FABSPRAY FABRIC WATER
v. 296 one-pound cans, more or less, of "ABSPRAY
PROOFER." Default decree of condemnation, forfel-
ion. (I.F. & R. No. 356. I.D. No. 37658.)
LAY FABRIC WATER PROOFER," was not registered i.
ticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. An examina- .i.
ved that the label on the containers did not bear an :

United States Attorney for the District of Columbia, .L
:he Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the District Court
ir condemnation and confiscation of 296 one-pound can, :
* )r l*~-f a n. -.-r a- -* -






301-316]


NOT3 ES OF


Th OMENT


237


On September 2, 1960, no claimant having appeared, a default decree of con-
demnation and forfeiture was entered, and it was ordered that the product be
destroyed.
304. Lack of registration of "WAREXIN." T.S. v. 1,330 five-ounce containers,
more or less, of "WAREXIN." Consent decree of condemnation and re-


lease under bond.


(I.F. & R. No. 361.


I.D. No. 38532.)


The product, "WAREXIN," was not registered under the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.
On August 17, 1960, the United States Attorney for the District of Rhode
Island, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the District


Court a libel, praying seizure for condemnation and
ounce containers, more or less, of "WAREXIN" at Pro
that the product was an economic poison which had b
on or about January 15, 1960, by Guardian Chemica
Island City, N.Y., in violation of the Federal Insecticid
cide Act.
It was alleged that the product was not registered
Agriculture as required by section 4 of the act.
Davol Rubber Company of Providence, R.I., claimed
and requested its release under bond pursuant to the
entry of a condemnation decree.
On August 30, 1960, a decree of condemnation was e
that the product be released to the claimant under
bringing it into compliance with the act.


confiscation of 1,330 five-
vidence, R.I., and alleging
een transported interstate
i Corporation, from Long
e, Fungicide, and Rodenti-


with


the Secretary


ownership of the product
act and consented to the


entered and it was ordered
bond for the purpose of


305. Lack of required information on label and misbranding of "SANITIZED
SPX." U.S. v. two 55-gallon containers more or less of "SANITIZED


SPX." Consent decree of condemnation and release under bond. (I.F. &
R. No. 352. LD. No. 37216.)
An examination of the product "SANITIZED SPX" showed that the labels
brne by the containers of the product did not bear a statement giving the name
ard address of the manufacturer, registrant, or person for whom manufactured;
Sigredient statement; adequate directions for use; or an adequate warning or
iaution statement.
On May 9, 1960, the United States Attorney for the District of Massachusetts,
tig upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the District Court
a libel, praying seizure for condemnation and confiscation of two 55-gallon con-
tiners, more or less, of "SANITIZED SPX" kt Fall River, Mass., and alleging
that the product was an economic poison which had been transported interstate
on or about December 31, 1959, by Sanitized Inc., from New Preston, Conn., in
violation of the act.
It was alleged that the product was in violation of the act, in that the labels
a its outside containers did not bear the name and address of the manufac-
trer, registrant~ or person for whom manufactured.
t was alleged that the product was misbranded within the meaning of the
act in that its labels did not bear an ingredient statement giving the name and
percentage of each of the active ingredients, together with the total percent-
ge of the inert ingredients, or an ingredient statement giving the names of
each of the active and each of the inert ingredients in the descending order of
W percentage of each present in each classification, together with the total
percentage of the inert ingredients.
Sm a$ged that the product was further misbranded within the meaning
of te act in that its accomuanvin labeling did not contain directions for use


id






238


INSECTICIDE,


FUNGICIDE,


AND


RODENTICIDE


ACT


[I.F.R.NJ.


06. ~ack of registration of "WELDWOOD WOOD PRESERVATIVE."
83 one-gallon cans, more or less, and 60 one-quart containers,
less, of "WELDWOOD WOOD PRESERVATIVE." Default d
condemnation, forfeiture, and destruction. (LF. & R. No. 355.
87568. ) t
The product, "WDWOOD WOOD PRESERVATIVE," was not r
under the Federal Ine ide, Fngicide, and Rodenticide Act.
On May 31, 1960, the United States Attorney fr the Northern Distric
York, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in th
States District Court a Iibel, praying seizure for condemnation and con
of 83 one-gallon cans, more or less, and 60 one-quart containers, more
of "WELDWOOD WOOD PRESERVATIVE" at Syracuse, N.Y., and
that the product was an economic poison which had been transported ii
on or about July 15, 1959, by Brelnig Brothers, Inc;. from Hoboken, N.J
lation of the act.
It was alleged that the product was not registered with the Secretary
culture as required by section 4 of the act.
On July 1, 1960, no claimant having appeared, a default decree of co
tion and forfeiture was entered, and it was ordered that the pr
destroyed.


U.S. v.
more or
ecree olf
I.D. No.

...stered


t of New
e United
ifiscationJ
Sor less,'
alleging
oterstate
., in vio-


of Agri-


indemna-
oduct be


307. Misbranding of 'PROTEX AIR SANITIZE" UTJ.S v. 957 16-ounce con-
tainers, more or less, of SPROTEX AIR SANITIZER." Consent decree
of condemnation and release under bond. (I.F. & R. No. 357. I.D. No.
37513.)


The product, "PROTEX AIR SANITIZER," was nmisbran
meaning of the act in that when tested according to directions I
not kill all air-borne bacteria.
On June 13, 1960, the United States Attorney for the District
acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in th
a libel, praying seizure for condemnation and confiscation
containers, more or less, of "'TROTEX AIR SANITIZER" at J
and alleging that the product was an economic poison which
ported interstate on or about July 22, 1959, by A-M-R Chemica
from Brooklyn, N.Y., in violation of the Federal Insecticide,
Rodenticide Act.
It was alleged that the product was misbrand4ed within the
act in that the label stated in part:


ded within the
for use, it would


; of New Je
ie District (
of 957 16-c
ersey City,
had been t
1 Company,
Fungicide,


rsey,
Jourt
)unce
N.J.,
rans-
Inc.,
and


meaning of the


"Protex


CONSERVESB


* PRESERVES *


* PROTECTS


DIRECTIONS


Remove protective cap. Point container away
valve button to spray. For best results spray tow
container at least 3 feet from all surfaces. Do
A few seconds of spray is usually sufficient for
Use this spray regularly in sleeping rooms,, sick
kitchen, office; any areas where undesirable


from face. Press
ards ceiling. Hold
not spray plastics.
a complete room.
rooms, bathrooms,
odors may exist.


To reduce airborne germs, spray for 10 seconds in average size room.


BANISHES


UNPLEASANT ODORS *, KILLS


AIRBORNE


+*i






301-316)


NOTICES OF


JUDGMENT


239


condemnation was entered, and it was ordered that the condemned product
be released to the claimant under bond for the purpose of bringing it into com-
pliance with the act.
308. Lack of registration and misbranding of TAB PET LITTER" U.S.
v. 4,499 two-pound four-ounce bags, more or less, and 2,250 four-pound
eight-ounce bags, more or less, of "TAB PET UTTER." Consent
decree of condemnation and release under bond. (I.F. & R. No. 348.
I.D. No. 36632.) -


product,


"TA B


LITTER,"


was


registered


under


Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, and an examination of
the product showed that the labels on the containers of the product did not bear
an ingredient statement.
On April 13, 1960, the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New
York, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the District
Court a libel, praying seizure for condemnation and confiscation of 4,499 two-
pound four-ounce bags, more or less, and 2,250 four-pound eight-ounce bags,
more or less, of "TAB PET LITTER" at Brooklyn, N.Y., and alleging that
the product was an economic poison which had been transported interstate on
or about May 28, 1959, by the Paxton Processing Company, Inc., from Paxton,
Ill., in violation of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.
It was alleged that the product was not registered with the Secretary of
Agriculture as required by section 4 of the act.
It was alleged that the product was misbranded within the meaning of the
act in that its labels did not bear an ingredient statement giving the name and
percentage of each of the active ingredients, together with the total percentage
of the inert ingredients, or an ingredient statement giving the names of each of
the active and each of the inert ingredients in the descending order of the per-
centage of each present in each classification, together with the total percentage
of the inert ingredients.


Paxton Processing Company, Inc., Paxton, Ill., claimed ownership of
uct and requested its release under bond for the purpose of removing th
from under the jurisdiction of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
cide Act, and consented to the entry of a condemnation decree.
On June 3, 1960, a consent decree of condemnation was entered, and
demned product was released to the claimant for the purpose of rer
from under the jurisdiction of the act.


the prod-
e product
Rodenti-


t the con-
noving it


309. Lack of registration of "50% DDT DUST CONCENTRATE." U.S, v. 160
fifty-pound bags, more or less, of "50% DDT DUST CONCENTRATE."
Consent decree of condemnation and release under bond. (I.F. & R. No.
349. J.D. No. 37187.)
The product, "50% DDT DUST CONCENTRATE," was not registered under
the Federal Insecticide. Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.
On May 5. 1960, the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of North


Carolina, Wilmington Division. acting upon a report by
culture, filed in the District Court a libel praying se
and confiscation of 160 fifty-pound bags, more or less
CONCENTRATE" at Elizabethtown, N.O., and alleging 1
economic poison which had been transported interstate
1959, by Molony Fertilizer Company, from Charleston,
Federal Insecticide. Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.
It was alleged that the product was not registered
& m At Wh- j A .


r the Secretary of Agri-
izure for condemnation
, of "50% DDT DUST
that the product was an
on or about October 19,
S.C., in violation of the


with


the Secretary


***PET






SINSECTICIDE, FUNGICIDE, AND RODENTICIDE ACT [I.F.R.N.J,.

310. Lack of registration of "GREEN PRIDE 10% CHLORDANE POWDER,
"GREEN PRIDE DIELDRIN SPRAY," and "GREEN PRIDE MALA-
THION ALL-PURPOSE SPRAY." U.S. v. 502 one-pound containers,
more or less, of "GREEN PRIDE 10% CHLORDANE POWDER;" 251
one-pint" oitainits, more or less; of "GREEN PRIDE DIELDRIN
SPRAY" and 180 one-pint containers, more or less, of "GREEN PRIDE
MAiATHION ALL-PURPOSE SPRAY." Consent decree of condemna-
tion and release under bond. (I.F. & R. Nos. 36766, 36767, and 36768.)


The products, "GREEN PRIDE 10% CHLORDANE POWDER," "GREEN
PRIDE DIELDRIN SiPRAY," and "GREEN PRIDE MALATHION ALL-
PURPOSE SPRAY," were not registered uder the Federal Insecticide, F
cide, and Bodenticide Act.
On May 17, 1960, the United States Attorney for the District of Arizona,
acting upon a report by the Sedretary of Agrlclture, filed in the District Court
a libel, praying seizure for condemnation and confiscation of 502 one-pound con-
tainers, more or less, of "GREEN PRIDE 10% CHLORDANE POWDER ;" 251
one-pint containers, more ir less, of "GREEN PRIDE DIELDRIN SPRAY ;"
and 180 one-pint containers, more or es, of fGREEN PRIDE MALATHION
ALL-PURPOSE SPRAY" at GleidalelAriz., and alleging that the products were
economic poisons whidh had beda transported interstate on or about September
26, 1959, by Wilbur-Elis Company, from Chula Vista, Calif., in violation of the
act.
It was alleged that the products were not registered with the Secretary of
Agriculture as required by section 4 of the act.
Arizona Agro Phosphate Company, Glendale, Ariz., claimed ownership of the
products and requested their release under bond pursuant to the act and con-
sented to the entry of a condemnation decree. On June 28, 1960, a decree of
condemnation was entered and it was ordered that the condemned products be
released to the claimant.


311. Lack of registration of "SPRA-KILL 50% MALATHION SPRAY," and lack
of registration and misbranding of "EAGLE'S-7 KILLS RATS & MICE."
U.S. v. 272 four-ounce containers, more or less, of "SPRA-KILL 50%
MALATHION SPRAY," and 211 one-pound bags, more or less, of
"EAGLE'S-7 KILLS RATS & MICE." Default decree of condemnation
forfeiture and destruction. (I.F. & R. No. 340. I. D. Nos. 36996 and
36997.),
The products, "SPRA-KILL 50% MALATHION SPRAY," and "EAGLE'S-7
KILLS RATS & MICE," were not registered under the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. An examination of the product, "EAGLE'S-7
KILLS RATS & MICE" showed that the labels affixed to the containers did not
bear certain information required under authority of the act as to render it
likely to be read and understood by the ordinary individual under customary
conditions of purchase and use.
On January 27, 1960, the United States Attorney for the Eastern District
of Kentucky, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the
District Court a libel, praying seizure for condemnation and confiscation of 272
tour-ounce containers, more or less, of "SPRAY-KILL 50% MALATHION
SPRAY," and 211 one-pound bags, more or less, of "EAGLE'S-7 KILLS RATS &
MICE" at Lexington, Ky., and alleging that the products were economic poisons
which had been transported interstate on or about June 12, 1959, and October 22,
1959, by Bacon Products Co., from Chattanooga, Tenn., in violation of the act.
It was alleged that the products were not registered with the Secretary of


I;






301-316]


NOTICES


OF JUDGMfElI


241


Lack of registration and
WETTABLE POWDER."
"QUIST MALATHION 25
condemnation, forfeiture,
38533.)


misbranding of "QUIST MALATHION 25%
U.S. v. 77 four-pound bags, more or less, of
% WETTABLE POWDER." Default decree of
and destruction. (I.F & R. No. 360. I.D. No.


The product, "QUIST MALATHION 25% WETTABLE POWDER," was not
registered under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, and
an examination of the product showed that the label accompanying the product
did not contain directions for use.
On August 17, 1960, the United States Attorney for the District of Rhode
Island, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the District
Court a libel, praying seizure for condemnation and confiscation of 77 four-pound
bags, more or less, of "QUIST MALATHION 25% WETTABLE POWDER"
at Providence, R.I., and alleging that the product was an economic poison which
had been transported interstate on or about June 2, 1960, by Chemical Com-
pounding Corporation, from Newark, N.J., in violation of the act.
It was alleged that the product was not registered with the Secretary of Agri-
culture as required by section 4 of the act.
It was alleged that the product was misbranded within the meaning of the
act in that its labeling did not contain directions for use which are necessary,
and if complied with, adequate for the protection of the public.
On September 8, 1960, no claimant having appeared, a default decree of con-
demnation and forfeiture was entered, and the United States Marshal was
authorized to distribute the seized property to one or more public or charitable
institutions who could give proper assurance of its legitimate use, as selected by
the United States Attorney.
313. Misbranding of "COMBAT AEROSOL A POWERFUL DISINFECTANT."
U.S. v. 166 containers, more or less, of "COMBAT AEROSOL A POWER-
FUL DISINFECTANT." Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture, and
destruction. (I.F. & R. No. 351. I.D. No. 36539.)


The product, "COMBAT AEROSOL
misbranded within the meaning of thL
would not disinfect the articles named
property cleaned, and would not reduce
and viruses.
On April 22, 1960, the United State
Virginia, acting upon a report by the
District Court a libel, praying seizure
containers, more or less, of "COMBA
FECTANT" at Roanoke, Va., and alle
poison which had been transported inter
Products Company, from Chicago, Ill., in
It was alleged that the product was
act in that its label stated in part:


A POWERFUL DISINFECTANT," was
e act in that when used as directed it
on the label after the surfaces had been
the hazard of cross infection by bacteria

.s Attorney for the Western District of
e Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the
for condemnation and confiscation of 168
JT AEROSOL A POWERFUL DISIN-
sging that the product was an economic
;state on or about May 21,1959, by Hysan
Violation of the act.
misbranded within the meaning of the


"COMBAT
AEROSOL
A Powerful
DISINFECTANT


DIRECTIONS
For Disinfecting -
TlnlAJ A;iorwinnnoo vn anf R" m*, efmi anysm fn JIA 11j&






24ii2


IN8E1CTICIDEI,


FUNGICIDE,


AND


RODENTICIDE


ACT


[I.F.R.N.J.


Where, when used as directed, the product w
telephones, wash basins, refuse cans, urinals,
machinery, laundry chutes, door knobs, cal other
had been properly cleaned, and it would not redu
by bacteria and viruses.
On June 9, 1960, no claimant having appeared,
tion and forfeiture was entered, and it was
destroyed.


would not disinfect toilet seats,
hospital light switches, office
r equipment after the surfaces
ce the hazard of cross infection

a default decree of condemna-
ordered that the product be


Lack of registration and misbranding of "AUTOMATIC
CLEANER." U.8. v. 48 one-quart plastic bottles, 12 one-quart
0 one-pint cans, more or less, of AUTOMATIC BILGE CL
Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture, and destruction.
I. No. 866. I.D. No. 88551.)


BILGE-
cans, and
EANER."
(I.F. &


The product "AUTOMATIC BILWIE CLEANER' was not registered under the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodentieide Act, and an examination of the
product showed that the labels on the containers ao the product did not bear an
ingredient statement as required by the act.
On September 30, 1960, the United States Attorney for the District of Rhode
Island, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the United
States District Court a libel, praying seizure for condemnation and confiscation
of 48 one-quart plastic bottles, 12 one-quart cans, and 20 one-pint cans, more or
less, of "AUTOMATIC BILGE CLEANER"' at Providence, R.I., and alleging
that the product was an economic poison which had been transported interstate
on or about August 17, 1960, by Sudbury Laboratory, from Sudbury, Mass., in
violation of the act.
It was alleged that the product was not registered with the Secretary of
Agriculture as required by section 4 of the act.
It was alleged that the product was misbranded within the meaning of the
act in that the labels affixed to the containers of the product did not bear an
ingredient statement giving the name and percentage of each of the active
ingredients, together with the total percentage of the inert ingredients, or an
ingredient statement giving the names of each of the active and each of the
inert ingredients in the descending order of the percentage of each present in
each classification, together with the total percentage of the inert ingredients.
On October 21, 1960, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation
and forfeiture was entered, and it was ordered that the United States Marshal
destroy the product.
315. Lack of registration and misbranding of "STERILE-ATRE WITH ANTI-
SEPTIC IODINE." TLS. v. 59 72-ounce containers, more or less, of
"STERILE-AIRE WITH ANTISEPTIC IODINE." Default decree of
condemnation, forfeiture, and destruction. (I.F. & R. No. 353. I.D. No.
36785.)
The product, "STERILE-AIRE WITH ANTISEPTIC IODINE." was not reg-
istered under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, and an
examination of the product showed that the labels of the containers of the
product did not bear an ingredient statement, as required by the act.
On May 18, 1960, the United States Attorney for the District of Oregon, acting
upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the District Court a libel,
praying seizure for condemnation and confiscation*of 59 72-ounce containers,
more or less, of "STERILE-AIRE WITH ANTISEPTIC IODINE" at Medford,
Oreg., and alleging that the product was an economic poison which had been






801-8161


NOThIES OF


JUDQMENT


24&


r,mr


On June 27, 1960, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation and
forfeiture was entered, and it was ordered that the product be destroyed.
316. Lack of registration and misbranding of "BURTON BRAND POOL SAN-
ITIZER," and "PHOENIX BRAND SWIMMING POOL INHIBITORY
U.S. v. 47 sixteen-ounce containers, 34 one-quart containers, and 11 one-
gallon containers, more or less, of "BURTON BRAND POOL SANI-
TIZER" and 11 two-and-one-half-pound containers and 6 five-pound con-
tainers, more or less, of PHOENIXX BRAND SWIMMING POOL IN-
HIBITOR." Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture, and destruc-
tion. (I.F. & BR. No. 358. ID. Nos. 38210, 38211.)
The products, "BURTON BRAND POOL SANITIZED," and "PHOENIX
BRAND SWIMMING POOL INHIBITOR," were not registered under the Fed-
eral Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, and an examination of the
products showed that the labels on the containers of the products did not bear
nre nt statements as required by the act.
oiOzit Aiune 21, 1960, the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of
tnnsylvania, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the


District Court a libel, praying seizure for condemnation
sfrteelfa-one containers, 34 one-quart containers, and ll
more of less,of "BURTON BRAND POOL SANITIZER
if-B nd4 containers and 6 five-pound containers, more <
BtAlN D SWIMMING POOL INHIBITOR" at Allentov
tht tle products were economic poisons which had been
on or aboit April 28, 1960, by the Burton Chemical Com
NY., in violation of the act.
It was alleged that the products were not registered
Agriculture as required by section 4 of the act.


and confiscation of 47
one-gallon containers,
" and 11 two-and-one-
)r less, of "PHOENIX
vn, Pa., and alleging
transported interstate
npany, from Jamaica,
with the Secretary of


It was alleged that the products were misbranded in that the labels borne by
the products did not bear ingredient statements giving the name and percentage
of each of the active ingredients, together with the total percentage of the inert
ingredients, or an ingredient statement giving the names of each of the active
and each of the inert ingredients in the descending order of the percentage of
each present in each classification, together with the total percentage of the
inert ingredients.
On August 10, 1960, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation
and forfeiture was entered, and it was ordered that the products be destroyed.






244


INSECTICIDE,


FUNGICIDE,


IDESX TO NOTICES 0.
N.J. No.


Automatic Bilge Cleaner
Sudbury Laboratory ---
Burton Brand Pool Sanitizer
Burton Chemical Co --..-
Combat Aerosol A Powerful
Disinfectant
Hysan Products Co------
Eagle's-7 Kills Rats & Mice
Bacon Products Co--------
Fabspray Fabric Water Proofer
Nu Color Corp. of Americat
50% DDT Dust Concentrate
Molony Fertilizer Co .-
Green Pride Dieldrin Spray
Wilbur-Ellis Co--_--_.---_
Green Pride Malathion All-Pur-
pose Spray
Wilbur-Ellis Co.-. --.
Green Pride 10% Chlordane
Powder
Wilbur-Ellis Coo_ ...
Hari-Kari Lindane Vaporizing
Units
The Neodane Co ---- _
Hari-Kari Lindane Vaporizing
Units
J. H. Smith Co_ ---


314



31o

311

303

309

310


310


310


301


302


AND


B'


RODENTICIDE


ACT


JUDGEMENT 301-316


[ I.F.R.N.J.


MT Mn


Hari-Kari Silica Aerogel
The Neodane e-- -- -.._
Neodane Pellets
The Neodane Co----.......
Neodane Pellets
J. H. Smith Co--..........
Phoenix Brand Swimming Pool
Inhibitor
Burton Chemical Co--....
Protex Air Sanitizer
A-M-R Chemical Co., Inc-
Quist Malathion 25% Wettable
Powder
Chemi cal Compounding
Corp ... .............._
Sanitized SPX
Sanitized, Inc ---------
Spra-Kill 50% Malathion Spray
Bacon Products Co----
Sterile-Aire with Antiseptic Io-
dine
Advance Chemical Co-....
Tab Pet Litter
Paxton Processing Co., Inc.
Warexin
Guardian Chemical Corp__
Weldwood Wood Preservative
Breinig Brothers, Inc.....


302


316

307


Growth Through Agricultural Progress


.i .












































































































-"


EE

~Y :"
:I
i~".E..

,8:





":""












":"
x,


";,;iivi~





UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
I11111 U111111 IIII1111111IIIIIII
3 1262 08588 8369