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:
AA00008500:00008

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
S


362


W 47* '*
Ii X~iR.

I1**.*.'


332-351


Issued February 1962


BtsS :a --
.. H I, ** ..
*:X M .'> : .
.w .'


UNITED


STATES


DEPARTMENT


OF


muc
* 1.r


AGRICULTURE


AGRICULTURAL


RESEARCH


SERVICE


PLANT PEST CONTROL DIVISION


'ICES OF


JUDGMENT UNDER


THE FEDERAL INSECTICIDE,


FUNGICIDE,


.jtr
*k 1


AND


Nos.


RODENTICIDE


ACT


332-351


hefollowing notices of judgment relate to cases arising in the United States
strict Courts and are approved for publication as provided in section 6 of the
eral Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 135d).


S- Admin
JABHINrGTON, D.C., Nov. 24, 1961.
'" a ak' of registration of "FLY
:,:: containers, more or less, of' L
decree of condemnation an relP]
lii, !purpose of. bringing produ in o
.i No. 862. I.D. No. 38545.) 1 V


B. T. SHAW
ural Research Service


D." U.S. v. 4,198
ORD." Consent
r bond for the
et. (I.F. & R.


'~I~!~~ie product "FLY BAN INSEC CI TCIh CORD 4vas n s
4yi .r1 Insecticide, Fungicide, and Iden u cide Act.
SSeptember 2, 1960, the United .rict for
:IaHampshire, acting upon a report he- gri
United States District Court a libel for co
.. on of 4,198 containers, more or les, rFLY BAN
&RD" at Manchester, N.H., alleging the product was an economy
'. een transported interstate on or about July 14, 1960, by C-J
',;from Little Bras d'Or, Nova Scotia, Canada, in violation of
.JJt*,= was alleged that the product was not registered with tt
jpgdulture as required by section 4 of the act.
-. -JXay-C Chemicals, Ltd., Little Bras d'Or, Nova Scotia, Canada,
iJ ."' the product and requested its release under bond for
"ng it into compliance with the Federal Insecticide,
l|| 4, ,-On May 31, 1961, a consent decree of condemnation was enter
k :~ai.rsd hv the Conrt tha t the nrodnpt he released to the i alim:


;tered under the


the District
culture, filed
ndemnation a
INSECTICII
iic poison wh
ay-C Chemics
the act.
ie Secretary


of
in
nd
DE
ich
lts,


, claimed owner-
the purpose of
Fungicide, and


-red and it was
ant under bond.


r


ah.1






INSECTICIDE,


On May
Washington
Agriculture,
for condemn
"NORKEM
alleging tha


9, 1961, the
Southern
filed in th
nation and
MALATHI
t the produ


FUNGICIDE,


AND


RODENTIC


e United States Attorney for the
Division, acting upon a report
e United States District Court a
confiscation of 660 forty-pound b
ON GRAIN PROTECTANT" at
ct was an economic poison which


interstate on or about July 3 and July
from Fresno, Calif., in violation of the act.
It was alleged that the product was
Agriculture as required by section 4 of the
It was further alleged that the product
the act in that its label stated in part :
"MALATHION (0,0-dimethyl dithioph
(PREMIUM GRADE MALATH


1959, by


De-


262


not registered with the Secretary 0o
act.
was misbranded within the meaning d

osphate of diethyl mercaptosucite
ION I 1%


and such statements were false or misleading since they implied or represented .
that the product contained 1% of malathion and 99% of inert ingredients; where- ..:
as, the product contained less ii 1% malathion and more thanI 9% of in
ingredients.
It was further alleged that the product was adulterated within the meaning
of the act in that its strength or purity fell below the professed standard or
quality as expressed on its labeling since its labeling bore the statement
"MALATHION (0,0-dimethyl dithiophosphate of diethyl mercaptosuccinate)
(PREMIUM GRADE MALATHION) 1%
INERT 90%-
$ .
and such statements repeseni that the product contained 1% of malathion
and 99% of inert ingredients; whereas, the product contained less than.
,of malathion and more than 99% of inert ingredients.
On J.ne 12, 19&8, a consent decree of condemnation was entered and the :
United States MarajIwas ordered to destroy the product.

334. Lack of registrion and misbranding of "BRISK AIR SANITIZER.
v. 369 oneiund containers, more or less, of "BRISK AIR SANITIZER."
Consent of condemnation and release of the product under bond
for purpoeof bringing it into compliance with the act. (I.F. & R. No.
374. I.D. No. 0~-007.) A
The product, "BRS ~AIR SANITIZER," was not registered under the as
Insecticide, Fungicidf :and Bodenticide Act, and its label failed to bear an.
ingredient statement .O .U
On January 23, 1961, the United States Attorney for the Western District of .'
Oklahoma, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in
United States District Court a libel praying seizure for condemnation an con- ....
fiscation of 369 one-pound containers, more or less, of "BRISK AIR SANI-
TIZER" at Oklahoma City, Okla., and alleging that the product was an economic
poison which had been transported interstate by Chase Products Co.^ on or about
July 18, and September 29, 1960, from Broadview, IIH, i
It was alleged that the product was not registered with the Secrea o
Agriculture as required by section 4 of the act.
It was alleged that the product was misbranded in that the label borne y e .-
product did not bear an ingredient statement giving the name and erceng of..
each of the active ingredients, together with the total pthela


IDE ACT [I.F.1 .lN
S:: ..II.
k Eastern District CA .
by the Secretary o
libel praying seizure l
age, more or less, o'f
Yakima, Wash., ana.:
had been transported. .:
Pester Western, Inc., i
U **...







332-351]


NOTICES


JUDGMENT


263


Misbranding of "TOMAC
CHEM #51." U.S. v. 76
MAC PERMACHEM #21
"TOMAC PERMACHEM
destruction. ((I.F. & R.


PERMACHEM #21" and "TOMAC PERMA-
four-ounce containers, more or less, of "TO-
" and 31 one-gallon containers, more or less of
#51." Decree of condemnation, forfeiture, and
No. 384. I.D. Nos. 39227 and 39229.)


The products, "TOMAC PERMACHEM #21" and "TOMAC PERMACHEM
#51" were misbranded in that when used as directed they were ineffective as
hospital disinfectants for the uses claimed on the labels.


On March 21, 1961,
Missouri, Western Div
filed in the United Stal
and confiscation of
PERMACHEM #21"
PERMACHEM #51"
"TOMAC PERMACH


December


1960 and


the United St
ision, acting up
tes District Cot
76 four-ounce
and 31 one-ga
at North Kans
EM #21" had


product


;ates Attorney for the


Western


Don a report by the Secreta
urt a Libel praying seizure
containers, more or 14
lion containers, more or
as City, Mo., and alleging
been transported inters


"TOM AC


PERMACHEM


ry o:
for (
?SS,
less,
tha
tate


#51"'


District of


;riculture,
lemnation
"TOM AC
"TOMAC
e product
or about
had been


transported interstate on or about October 12 and October 21, 1960 by Permachem
Corp., from West Palm Beach, Fla., in violation of the act.
It was alleged that the product "TOMAC PERMACHEM #21" was misbranded
within the meaning of the act in that its labeling bore the statements :
(Container label)


"Tomac
permachem


Permanent
Antiseptic


#21

FOR USE AS

surface spray


ON HOSPITAL WALLS, DRAPES, MATTRESSES,
ETC. IN ACCORDANCE WITH DIRECTIONS FOR
DILUTION AND USE AS A COARSE WET SPRAY
IN ACCOMPANYING CIRCULAR.


Folly hospital tested. A disinfectant wit
effectiveness.
For use quarterly or semiannually, as directed.


h


long-lasting


antiseptic


(Accompanying labeling)


"Tomac
permachem


Permanent
Antiseptic


#21
FOR USE AS
surface spray


ON HOSPITAL WALLS, DRAPES, MATTRESSES,
ETC. IN ACCORDANCE WITH DIRECTIONS FOR
DILUTION AND USE AS A COARSE WET SPRAY


.t 335.


i




r"
SNal
* I...
i' YI "xT~l a.


264


INSECTICIDE,


FUNGICIDE,


AND


RODENTICIDE


ACT


on the particular hospital's degree of air contamination by dirt) to the wA
and ceilings enclosing 10,000 cubic feet. Moisten surfaces thoroughly but "i.
to the point where the solution drips or runs. .
As with other sprays, individuals who apply Tomac-Permachem 21 should wear
goggles and a surgical mask. After spraying, air room for 15 minutes befotw*
putting into use. Tomac-Permachem may be used to spray wall and ceiling
surfaces, furniture, drapes, curtains, mattresses, other inanimate objects wbex'!H
the disinfectant action of the Tomac-Permachem 21 is desired. .,


and sudh statements were false or misleading since they implied or represent
tJat the product, when used as directed, would disinfect hospital walls,- drapn.,
mattresses, furniture, curtains, ceiling surfaces and all other articles and s ,.'
faces implied b the terms "etc." and "other inanimate objects", Wf ei9as,
product when used as diretd, would not disinfect hospital walls, drape. tat--
tresses, furniture, curtains, ceiling surfaces or all other articles or surface
implied by the terms "et." and '~other iaitiate object ."
It was alleged that the product "TOMAC PERMACHEM #51" was misbrandedj.i
within the meaning of the act in that its labeling bore the statements: -
"Tomac Permanent
Antiseptic
permachem


FOR


USE IN


WASHING

MOPPING


AND


WATER


Kills most bacteria and fungi that can cause infection, odors,
mildew, mold and decay.


FULLY


HOSPITAL


TESTED.


A DISINFECTANT


WITH


LONG-LASTING ANTISEPTIC EFFECTIVENESS.
For hospital use in floor mopping and pail solutions for washing bed-
frames, bedside tables, windowsills, walls and in other normal cleaning
operations in accordance with directions for dilution.


DIRECTIONS FO

Use one ounce of this concentrate for each
water required. Stir. Wash inaniinate
For convenience when more than one gal
a time, pump one ounce for eacb gallon
container being used.
en

and such statements were false or misleading
that the product, when used as directed, wo
frames, bedside tables, windowsills, and walls


USE


gallon of washing or mopping
objects or mop floors as usual.
Ion of water is being used at
in plastic cup, then pour into


since they implied or represented .I
uld disinfect hospital floors, bed...
; whereas, the product, when used "H
6 .* C 4*** _."






I4.
*. '.4;


NOTICES


JUDGMENT


265


f*- k e, product "CHLORO IPC GRANULES" was inten
"..:.de .ionomic poison within the meaning of the Federal Inse
:".". Rordenticide Act, and had been shipped in fifty-pound bags
.s" failed to bear information required by the act.
On January 10, 1961, the United States Attorney for t
.:!. Wahington, Southern Division, acting upon a report by
; lture, filed in the United States District Court a lib'
,". condemnation and confiscation of 400 fifty-pound ba
:. .- HLORO IPC GRANULES" at Yakima, Wash., and all
was an. economic poison which had been transported i
S'May 15, 1958, by Jack Wilson Chemical Company, fro


ded to be used as an
cticide, Fungicide, and
i which were unlabeled


:he Eastern
the Secretai
el praying s
gs, more o
eging that tl
interstate or
m Stockton,


districtt of
7 of Agri-
?izure for
less, of
e product
or about
Calif., in


.: violation of
S'It was a
name and
fractured;
sold; and
container.
It was a
act in that
the name a
eentage of


I
(
(


the act.
alleged that the product did not bear a label setting forth (1) the
address of the manufacturer, registrant, or person for whom manu-
2) the name, brand, or trade-mark under which the product was
P3) a statement of the net weight or measure of the contents of the


lUeged that the product was misbranded within the meaning of the
it did not bear a label setting forth an ingredient statement giving
md percentage of each active ingredient, together with the total per-
the inert ingredients, in the product, or, in the alternative, an in-


gredient statement giving the name of each active ingredient, together with the
name of each and total percentage of the inert ingredient, in the product.
It was further alleged that the product was misbranded within the meaning
of the act in that its labeling did not contain directions for use which are neces-
sary and, if complied with, adequate for the protection of the public.
On June 8, 1961, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation and
forfeiture was entered and the United States Marshal was ordered to destroy
the product, with the exception of ten bags of the product, which were to be
released from his custody to the custody of Jack Wilson for the purpose of


introduction into evidence in an action pending in the District Cc


United States, Northern Dis
bags to be returned to the
Washington for destruction.


urt


trict of California, Southern Division, the said ten
United States Marshal for the Eastern District of


337. Lack of registration of "SPEEDLTTE BF-811." U.S. v. two 45-gallon drums,
more or less, of "SPEEDLITE BF-811." Consent decree of condemnation
and release under bond. (I.F. & R. No. 386. I.D. Nos. 39801 and 39802.)


The product, "SPEEDLITE BF-811," was not register
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.
On March 23, 1961, the United States Attorney for tl
Washington, Northern Division, acting upon a report
Agriculture, filed in the United States District Court a li
condemnation and confiscation of two 45-gallon drums, me
LITE BF-811" at Seattle, Wash., and alleging that the pr
poison which had been transported interstate on or a
February 21, 1961, by Patek & Co., from San Francisco,
the act.
It was alleged that the product was not registered
Agriculture as required by section 4 of the act.
Patek & Co., San Francisco, Calif., a corporation, cla
product and on June 9, 1961, a consent decree of condemn
Sit was ordered that the product be released to the claimant


red


under the


Federal


he Western District of
by the Secretary of
bel praying seizure for
ore or less, of "SPEED-
oduct was an economic
bout January 31 and
Calif., in violation of


with


the Secretary


imed ownership of the
ration was entered and
under bond.






266


INSECTICIDE,


FUNGICIDE,


AND


RODENTICIDE


ACT


[I.F.R.NJ.


Upon examination, the product "I-CLEAR A LIQUID GERMICIDE FOR
SWIMMING POOL WATER," was found to contain less available iodine than
claimed and when used as directed, it was found that the product did not
contain 0.5 ppm of iodine. The product was also misbranded in that it b
labeling which claimed or implied that it was recommended and end oree...
U.S. Department of Agri ulture whereas, it was not. The label fo
"O-CLEAR POR THEa CONVENIENT TREATMENT OF SWIMMING POP L
WATER," did not bear a statementgiving the name, brand or trademark ,
which the article was sold, or a statement of net weight 6t
content, or a statement giving the name and address of the manufacturer,
registrant or person for whom manufactured. The product was also misbranded
in that its label did not bear an ingredient statement and directions for use.
On May 22, 1961, ;the United States Attorney for the Western District of
Oklahoma, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in
United States District Court a libel, praying seizure for condemnation an con-
fiscation of 226 one-pint bottles, more or less, of "I-CLEAR A LIQUID GERMI-
CIDE FOR SWIMMING POOL WATER ;" 9 cases, more or less. each contain-
ing 214 packages of "0-CLEAR FOR THE CONVENIENT TREATMENT OF


SWIMMING POOL WATER;" and 200 circulars, more or
statement, "FACTS I-OLEAR: A PLEASANT LEMON-CLE
Oklahoma City, Okla., and alleging that the products were
which had been transported interstate on or about July 30 a
1960, by Barron Sales Corp., from Dallas, Texas, in violation
It was alleged that the product, "I-CLEAR A LIQUID G
SWIMMING POOL WATER," was misbranded within the m
in that its labeling bore the statements:
(Circular)


less, bearing the
AR IODINE," at
economic poisons
md September 21,
of the act.
ERMICIDE FOR
meaning of the act


"U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE: 1-CLEAR claims have been
cleared and accepted by the U.S. Department of Agriculture."


(Label)


"A 13% Available Iodine

I-CLEAR
*

DIRECTIONS


INITIAL TREATMENT: Four
Ions of swimming pool water.
WEEKLY TREATMENT: One
ions of swimming pool water.
METHOD: Pour directly into


pints of I-CLEAR to 30,000 gal-

pint of I-CLEAR to 30,000 gal-


pool


or feed


through


chemical pump. For color intensification and fl<
our companion product CHEM CLEAR.
TESTING: With standard OTO test kit maintain
low test of sample water to stand approximately
reach maximum color.
ACTIVE INGREDIENTS:
Nonylphenoxypoly (ethyleneoxy) ethanol-Io'
(providing 13% available iodine)
INERT INGREDIENTS:


normal


occulation use


0.5 ppm. Al-
30 minutes to


dine


Complex


50%

50%


uu!u~








Sfl-6s.MJ


NOTICES


OF JUDGMENT


267


It was further alleged that the product "I-CLEAR A LIQUID GERMICIDE
FOR SWIMMING POOL WATER," was adulterated within the meaning of the
act in that its strength or purity fell below the professed standard or quality as
expressed on its labeling, since the labeling bore the statements :


"ACTIVE INGREDIENTS:
Nonylphenoxypoly (ethyleneoxy)
ethanol-Iodine Complex
(providing 13% available iodine)
INERT INGREDIENTS:


* lr


and such
iodine; v
It was
MENT O
of the act
of (1) tl
whom mj


whereas,
alleged tl
F SWIM
in that
he name
anufactu


product was sold,
containers.
It was further al
ENT TREATMENT
the meaning of the
giving the name and
percentage of the ii
ingredient statement
the name of each an
It was further alle
TREATMENT OF S
the meaning of the


product co
the product,
NG POOL
labels on its
d address c


that the


ntained les
"C-CLEAR
WATER." v
; immediate
if the man


nam


or (3)


e. bran


the net weight


13% of
ailable i
ENIEN'
within th
t bear a
int, or
under v


of the contents


leged that the product, "C-CLEAR FOR THE CONVENI-
OF SWIMMING POOL WATER," was misbranded within
act in that its labels did not bear an ingredient statement
percentage of each active ingredient, together with the total


nert
t gi
d toi
bged
WIact
act


Ing
ing
tal I
tha
IMI
in


which are necessary,


in the product, or, in tl
o of each active ingredih
of the inert ingredients
uct, "C-CLEAR FOR Ti]
WATER." was further ]
ibeling did not contain
with, adequate for the


he alternative
ent, together
Sin the prodi
IE CONV EN]
misbranded w
directions fi
protection o


e, an
with
uet.
[ENT
'ithin
r use
f the


public.
On July 13, 1961, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation was
entered and it was ordered that the United States Marshal deliver the products
to the Federal Reformatory at El Reno, Okla., for use only as a general dis-
infectant and that the United States Marshal destroy the accompanying labeling.


339. Lack


BOMB." U.S. v. 116 contz
KILLER BOMB." Consen
bond. (I.F. & R. No. 378.


f "LAWTON INSECT
or less, of "LAWTON


decree of condemnation and
I.D. No. 38903.1


release


KILLER
INSECT
se under


The product "LAWTON INSECT KILLER BOMB"


the Federa
branded in
On Febr
of Florida,
United Stn
confiscation


ecticide, Fungicide, and Rod
its label bore a false or misle
16, 1961, the United States
ing upon a report by the S5


District (
116 conta
e


BOMB" at Jacksonvilh
poison which had been
Aerosol Corporation of


-
tr
th


court
lers,
'la.,
nspo
Sou


a lib
more
and a
rted ii
th, fri


el pra;
or les
Ileging


enticide


not registered under
he product was mis-


adding statement.
Attorney for the Southern District
secretary of Agriculture, filed in the
ying seizure for condemunatirn and
s. of "LAWTON INSECT KILLER


T


utersta tE


that the
Son or I


fli
ibc


mu Arlington, Tenn


product was an economic
>ut December 1. 1960, by
., in violation of the act.


statements represented


50%


50%


product contained
s than 13% of ar
I FOR THE CONV
vas misbranded w
Containers did nol
ufacturer, registrar
d. or trademark


f available
iodine.
T TREAT-
e meaning
statement
person for
ihich said


of the


or measure


redients,
the name
percentage
t the prod
NG POOL
that its la


if complied


of registration and misbranding (


liners, more


was




* i. ..... l
-.... .
... i
H.
.: ." ::V


268


IN SE CTICID E,


FUNGICIDE,


AND


RODENTICIDE


ACT


- ,
.


Aerosol Corporation of the South, Arlington, Tenn., and Lawton Broth
Jacksonville, Fla., claimed ownership of the product and requested its rele .
under bond for the purpose of bringing the product into compliance with the a i.
and consented to the entry of a condemnation decree. On May 22, 1961, a deerp(j
of condemnation was entered and it was ordered that the product be relea e.
to the claimants under bond. .. i
21n T LiL nof rnae itrfi;nn anfl miEkrraninra of ".QTTRniATII NOTTnT.-YTirF


PYROCIDE INSECT SPRAT." U.S. v.
"SURDEATH NON-TOXIC PYROCIDE
cree of condemnation and .releas:uinder
No. 88904.)


188 containers, more or less, i
INSECT SPRAY." Consent
bd.kWC.onsent


The producnet L"'BRDEATE NON-TOXIC PYROCIDE INSECT PB W? W
not registered under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide ...
The product was misbranded in that its label bore a false or misleading -

in February 16, 1981i the United States Attorney for the Southern Di tri
of Flrida, acting upon' a report by the Secretary of Agarieituin
United States District OJurt a libel praying seizure for condemnation and col- :
fiscation of 188 containers, more or less, of "SURDEATH NON-TOXIC PYRO- N
CIDE INSECT SPRAY" at Jacksonville, Fla., and alleging that the product was-
an economic poison which had been transported interstate on or .-4 ,
7, 1960, by Aerosol Corporation of the South, from Arlington, Ti
of the act.
It was alleged that the product was not registered with the Secretary ofh.*"
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 label bore the unqualified statement: o


"UNIVERSAL MFG. & SUPPLY
1051 Walnut Street
Phone: EL. 6-8640
Jacksonville, Florida"


N
*i1


and such statement was false or misleading since it implied or represented that
the Universal Mfg. & Supply Co., 1051 Walnut Street, Jacksonville, Fla., was the ,|
manufacturer of the product; whereas, the Universal Mfg. & Supply Co., 1051; .i
Walnut Street, Jacksonville, Fla. was not the manufacturer of the product.
Aerosol Corporation of the South, Arlington, Tenn., and Univeria
Supply Co., Jacksonville, Fla, claimed ownership of the product and requested- I
its release under bond for thie purpose of bringing the product into compliance tH
with the act, and consented to the entry of a condemnation decree. On May22,
1961, a decree of condemnation was entered and it was ordered that"rhe prou
be released to the claimants under bond.

341. Lack of registration of SANI-DINTE IODINE SANITIZER AND DISIN- .|
FECTANT" and "SANO-KOL CHLORINATED STERILIZER AND DIS-
INFECTANT. U.S. v. 23 one-gallon containers, more or lef
"SANI-DINE IODINE SANITIZER AND DISINFECTANT" and 43o
gallon containers, more or less, of "SANO-KOL CHLORINATED-
STERILIZER AND DISINFECTANT." Default decree of condemnation, *
forfeiture and destruction. (I.F. & R. No. 380. I.D. Nos. 38777
38778.)
Tjn nlra "Crrn+. "afl A "TT T TT.Ti TiflTT A TT1TPrIF7 'ID A N.T Ta T'NTITITr rA 1 TFrL.;.'..


,rLEi:F;


1




Wt~~i<
I V
I'',...
>7;
S
H'
J.


NOTICES


. at I..was alleged that the products were
:4.iigriculture as required by section 4 of the a
.."- On March 22, 1961, no claimant having
*.. and forfeiture was entered and the United
^ the products.


JUDGMENT


269


not registered with the Secretary of
Lct.
appeared, a decree of condemnation
States Marshal was ordered to destroy


a..y

Li .4..
522..
S.


Misbranding of "GLASS WA
9,100 cases, more or less, t
less, twelve 23-ounce cont
containers; and 495 cases,
of "GLASS WAX, GLASS
condemnation and release
37964, 37966, 37967.)


X, GL
:welve
ainers
more
AND
undei


ASS AND METAL C
13-ounce containers;
; 125 cases, more or
or less, twenty-four
METAL CLEANER."
bond. (I.F. & R.


:LEANER." U.S. v.
; 595 cases, more oi
less, six 128-ounce
6-ounce containers,
Consent decree of
No. 389. I.D. Nos.


:- .. The product, "GLASS WAX, GLASS AND METAL CLEANER,"
,. branded under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act,
was ineffective for disinfecting the articles named on its label.


.' :On April 3, 1961, the United
SIfllinois, Eastern Division, acting
filed in the United States Distr
:d. tion and confiscation of 6,300 c
,. 100-cases, more or less, twelve
128.ounce containers, of "GLAS
... Chicago, Ill., and alleging that
S"been transported interstate on o
Sby R. M. Hollingshead Corp.,
twelve 13-ounce containers; 240
'- 50 cases, more or less, six 128-
':- twenty-four 6-ounce containers
961 -by Gold Seal Co., Inc., fror


13-ounce containers ;
cases, more or less,


States
g upon a
'ict Cour
cases, mo
23-ounce
S WAX,
the prod


Attorney for the Northe
report by the Secretary


t a libel pra
're or less, t
! containers;
GLASS AN
uct was an


ying seizure
welve 13-our
50 cases, m1
D METAL (
economic poi


,rn
of
for
ice
ore
.LE
son


ir about December 6, 1960 and Janua
from Camden, N.J.; 1,500 cases, mn
cases, more or less, twelve 23-ounce
*ounce containers; and 395 cases, m
which were shipped on or about F
n Atlanta, Ga.; 1,300 cases, more or


cases, more or less,
128-ounce containers


twelve
: and


23-ounce
100 cases,


con


was mis-
in that it


District of
Agriculture,
condemna-
containers:
or less, six
3ANER," at
which had
ry 11, 1961.
ore or less,
containers;
ore or less,
ebruary 14,
less, twelve
tainers; 25


more


or less,


twenty-four
1961 by Uni
of the act.
It was all
act in that itl


."Glass
Wax


6-ounce containers which were shipped on or about
on Terminal Warehouse Co., from Jacksonville, Fla


eged that the product
s label stated in part:


was


NEW FORMULA
disinfects, too!


misbranded

GOLD
SEAL


within


February 17,
in violation


the meaning


of the


Glass
Wax


NEW MULTI-USE


Gleans
Polishes
Thsinfects
Windows &
Mirrors


Glass
Wax
GLASS AND METAL CLEANER


Cleans
Polishes
Disinfects


Refrigerators
& Stoves


lirJT-
*:.......


CLEANS. POLISHES DISINFECTS*
WINDOWS, CHROME, SILVERWARE
REFRIGERATORS, STOVES, TILE
contains *GERMICIDE G-17


Tile
ar^ .L-1







270


INSECTICIDE,


FUNGICIDE,


AND


RODENTICID


DIRECTIONS:


1. Shake can.
2. Pour just a small am
cellulose sponge.
3. Apply thin coat evenly
uneven surfaces such
4. Wipe surface clear with


ount of


"GLASS


WAX"


on entire surface to be c
s silverware, apply with
soft clean cloth.


E ACT [I.(P.R.NJ.



on a damp

leaned (for


For best results, USE SPARINGLY


and such statements were false or misleading since they implied or represented
that the product, when used as directed, would disinfect windows, mirrors,
automobile bodies, chrome, silverware, refrigerators, stoves, tile, metal appli-
ances, and all other articles and surfaces implied by the words "Glass and Metal
Surfaces" and "every surface;" whereas, the product, when used as directed,
would not disinfect windows, mirrors, automobile bodies, chrome, silverware, .::
refrigerators, stoves, tile, metal appliances, or all other articles or surfaces
implied by the words "Glass and Metal Surfaces" and "every surface."
Gold Seal Co., Bismarek, N. Da cl., aimed ownership of the product and re-
quested its release under bond, for purpose of bringing it into compliance with ,,J
the act and consented to the entry of a condemnation decree. On May 22, 1961, "
a decree of condemnation was entered and it was ordered that the product be
released to the claimant under bond.

343. Lack of registration of "SANIDINE. U.S. v. 31 one-gallon containers,
more or less, of "SANIDINE." Default decree of condemnation, for-
feiture, and destruction. (I.T. & R. No, 388. I.D. No. 38079.) .
The product "SANIDINE" was not registered under the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. .
On March 30, 1961, the United States Attorney for the District of Arizona, act- "4
ing upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the United States ..
District Court a libel praying seizure for condemnation and confiscation of 31
one-gallon containers, more or less, of "SANIDINE," at Tucson, Ariz., and al-
leging that the product was an economic poison which had been transported ..
interstate on or about October 17 and October 25, 1960, by Central Iodine, Inc.,
from Dallas, Tex., 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.
On August 21, 1961, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation
and forfeiture was entered and it was ordered that the product be destroy.

344. Lack of registration and misbranding of "ALL-NIGHT MOSQUITO LO-
TION." U.S. v. 798 three-ounce bottles, more or less, of "ALL-NIGHT
MOSQUITO LOTION." Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture, and .
destruction. (I.F. & R. No. 383. I.D. No. 39250.) --
The product, "ALL-NIGHT MOSQUITO LOTION," was not registered under
the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. An examination of
the product showed that the labels borne by the product did not bear an in-
gredient statement as required by the act.
On March 20, 1961, the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of
Arkansas, Western Division, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agricul-


:. :..* il
"*v
-* .:hj

X::


n iiirii"

(ii; $i-
;i"l 8" i


* ** K K^& &Vy&WV' *y&


~;iii~f







332-351]

the total
the name
ing order
the total I
On May
tion, forfi


NOTICE S


JUDGMENT


percentage of the inert ingredients, or an
of each of the active and each of the iner
of the percentage of each present in each
percentagee of the inert ingredients, in the pr
22, 1961, no claimant having appeared, a
ilture, and destruction was entered, and it


271


ingredient st
t ingredients
classification
oduct.
default decre
was ordered 1


atement giving
in the descend-
, together with

e of condemna-
that the United


States Marshal destroy the product.

345. Lack of registration and required information on label and misbranding
of "DIXSOLINE." U.S. v. 34 one-gallon cans, more or less, of "DIXSO-
LINE." Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture and destruction.
(I.F. & R. No. 345. I.D. No. 37160.)


The product "DIXSOLINE" wa.!
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.
the labels borne by the containers
weight or measure of the contend
gredient statement as required by t
On April 22, 1960, the United


t registered unie
examination of
he product did nc
f the containers
ct.
tes Attorney for


North Carolina, Raleigh Division, acting upon a report by
Agriculture, filed in the United States District Court a libel p
condemnation and confiscation of 34 one-gallon cans, more or
LINE," at Raleigh, N.C., and alleging that the product was aI
which had been transported interstate on or about June 13.
1959, by Dixie Chemical Co., Inc., from New Orleans, La.. in vi


r the Federal Insecticide,
the product showed that
)t bear a statement of net
and did not bear an in-


the


It was a
Agriculture
It was fu


Ileged that t
as required b
rather alleged


he p
y sec
that


bear a statement of the net weigh
It was further alleged that the
of the act in that its labels did


name


percent


of each


ac


product was not registered
tion 4 of the act.


the labels on the


t or
proi
not
*tive


centage of the inert ingredients, in the
statement giving the name of each act
each and total percentage of the inert
On October 4. 1960, no claimant ha'


and destruction was entered, and it
destroy the product.


measure
luct was
bear an
ingredie
product
ive ingre
ingredie
ring app


was


with


stern


the
rayin
less.
n eco
195S
iolati
the


containers of the
of the contents of
misbranded with
ingredient state
rt, together with
or the alternate' i
'dient, together wi
nts, in the produ
eared, a decree ol


ordered that' the United


District


Secret ry
ig seizure 1
of "DIXS
nomic pois
and l ay
on of the a
Secretary


prod u
the c
in thb
ent ;
ihe
-', an
ith th


t did not
ntainers.
meaning
ving the
Vital per-
igredient
nmnie of


f condemnation
States Marshal


346. Lack of registration of "AGSCO 300 ESTER. A WEED KILLER." U.S. v.
39 one-gallon containers, more or less, of "AGSCO 300 ESTER, A WEED
KILLER." Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture, and destruction.
(I.F. & R. No. 410. I.D. No. 39607.)


The product,


"AGSCO 300


ESTER.


A WEED


KI LER"'


under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.
On August 21, 1961, the United States Attorney for the
Dakota, Northern Division, acting upon a report by the Secrel


filed in the United States District Co
and confiscation of 39 one-gallon count
A WEED KILLER," at Watertown.
economic poison which had been tran
by Agsco Chemicals, Inc., from Gran
It was alleged that the product wa
culture as required by section 4 of the


t
I1

1


urt a libel pra
miners, more o
S. Dak., alle
sported inters
d Forks. N. D


s not register


ying :
r less,
ging 1
tate,
)ak., i
?d wil


was not

District


registered


C


tary of Agr


seizure for conde
of' "AGSCO 300
that the product
ron or about May
n violation of thi
th the Secretary


if South
culture,
nation
ESTER,
was an
12, 1961,
e act.
of Agri-


act.


1


..


- I.


w m






272


INSECTICIDE,


FUNGIIYD E,


AND RODENTICIDE


ACT


* "" .C
Cx'..~


The products "W-. A. BUTLER CO. GLYCOL AIR SANI
CO INSECT SPRAY," were not registered under the Fedi
cide, and Rodenticide Act.
On May 4, 1961, the United States Attorney for the Sou
Eastern Division, acting upon a report by the Secretary
the United States District Court a libel praying seizure
confiscation of 140 sixteen-ounce containers, more or less,
GLYCOL AIR SANITIZER," and 68 fourteen-ounce contr
"WA B CO INSECT SPRAY" at Columbus, Ohio, alleging
economic poisons which had been transported interstate,
ad December 28, 1960, respectively, by Chem Tech, Inc.,
in violation of the act.
it was~ aleged @at the products were not ergisterdd
Agrliculte as required by section 4 of the act.
On Angsrt 10, 1961, no claimant having appeared, a d
ani forfeiture was entered, and the United States Marsl
stroy the products.


ITIZER," and "WA?1ir
eral Insecticide, omn
ithern District of OhlI
of Agriculture, filed ina
for condemnation and :
of "W. A. BUTLER 080;.:
ainers, more or less, of.-
that the products were .i
on or about Olctberi it
from Mem is nn.
with tleS


lecree of condemnation
hal was ordered to de- q
"'4


348. Lack of registration of IRX SAFE GAIR THE RAGAN
FRESH] THAT SANITIZES" U.S. v. 234 eiglit-ouncC eWia gf .
Sore or less, of RX SAFE AIR THE FRAGRANT OO Ii RE
THAT SANITIZES." Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture and -
destruction. (IF. & IL o 382. I.D. No. 38661.) 1
The product, "RX SAFE AIR THE FRAGRANT ROOM REFRESHER THAT ):
SANITIZES," was not registered under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and i
Rodenticide Act.
On March 15, 161, the United States Attorney for the District of Connecticut,-
acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the United States
District Court a^iibel praying seizure for condemnation and
eight-ounce containers, more or less, of "EX SAFE AIR THE FRAGRANT -
ROOM REFRESHER THAT SANITIZES," at New Haven, Conn., alleging that .j.
the product was an economic poison which had been transported interstate, a4t
or about November 16, 1960, by Lynwood Laboratories from Norwood, Mass., 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.
On September 28, 1961, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation ja
and forfeiture was entered, and the United States Marshal was ordered to de-3
stroy the product. i'


Lack of re
v. 168 f
trainers,
Consent
No. 402.


,gistration of SUREE MACY POOL WATER PURIFIER." U.S.
ve-pound containers, more or less, and 191 sixteen-ounce con-
more or less, of "SUPRE MACY POOL WATER PURIFIER."
decree of condemnation and release under bond. T!i
LD). No. 39637.)


The product "SUPRE MACY POOL WATER PURIFIER," was not registered :
under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. .. t
On June 29, 1961, the United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey-,::
acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the United Statesb,
District Court a libel praying seizure for condemnation and confiscation of 168 .i
five-pound containers, more or less, and 191 sixteen-ounce containers, more or i
less, of "SUPRE MACY POOL WATER PURIFIER," at Bloomfield, N.J., al--~
irinlr that thn wrnAr* not wnaI an nnnmi ntuinn whioh hnd oan trenngnrtnt:t.







NOTICES


JUDGMENT


273


350. Lack of registration of "BURTON BRAND POOL SANITIZER." U.S. v.
2,326 fourteen-ounce containers, more or less, of "BURTON BRAND
POOL SANITIZER." Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture, and
destruction. (I.F. & R. No. 400. I.D. No. 39532.)


SThe product, "B
under the Federal I
On June 19, 1961
acting upon a repo
District Court a 1
2,326 fourteen-oun<


URTON BRAND POOL SANITIZER," v
insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.
, the United States Attorney for the Distr
rt by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in
ibel praying seizure for condemnation a
ce containers, more or less, of "BURTO


SANITIZER," at Garfield, N.J., alleging that
poison which had been transported interstate, o0
1961, by Burton Chemical Co., Inc., from Jama
the act.
It was alleged that the product was not reg
Agriculture as required by section 4 of the act.
On August 8, 1961, no claimant having appeal


ras


not registered


'ict of New Jersey,
the United States
nd confiscation of
N BRAND POOL


the product was an economic
n or about May 8 and May 10,
lica, L.I., N.Y., in violation of


;istered


with


the Secretary


red, a decree of condemnation


and forfeiture was entered and the United States Marshal was ordered to destroy
the product.


Lack of registration and misbranding of "AUTO 1
WASHABLE AIR FILTER WITH BUILT-IN GERM 1
U.S. v. 38 units, more or less, of "AUTO FLO PERMA
AIR FILTER WITH BUILT-IN GERM KILLING
decree of condemnation, forfeiture, and destruction.
I.D. No. 40020.)


FLO PER
KILLING
NENT WI
POWER."
(I.F. & I


MAN
POW
ASHA
Del
.. No.


ENT
ER."
BLE
fault
392.


"AUTO FLO PERMANENT WASHABLE AIR FILTER WITH


BUILT-IN GERM KILL
Insecticide, Fungicide, ai
showed that the labels a
ingredient statement as ri
On May 4, 1961, the
Ohio, Western Division,
filed in the United State


ING POWER," was not
ad Rodenticide Act, and
ffixed to the containers c
required by the act.
United States Attorney
acting upon a report by
s District Court a libel


registered under the Federal
an examination of the product
:f the product did not bear an

for the Northern District of
the Secretary of Agriculture,
praying seizure for condemna-


tion and confiscation of 38 units, more or less, of "AUTO FLO PERMANENT
WASHABLE AIR FILTER WITH BUILT-IN GERM KILLING POWER," at


Toledo, Ohio, alleging tha
transported interstate, on
Detroit, Mich., in violation
It was alleged that th
Agriculture as required by
It was further alleged
of the act in that the labe
an ingredient statement


gredient, together
product, or, in th
active ingredient
inert ingredients,
On September
entered, and the


question


t the product wa


or about A
of the act.
e product
section 4 o
that the pr
Is affixed t<
giving the


an economic poison which had been


Lpril 4, 1960, by


was not
f the act.
'oduct wa
Sthe cont1


name


Auto-Flo Corporation, from


registered


with


the Secretary


misbranded within the meaning
ners of the product did not bear


percentage of


each


active


r with the total percentage of the inert ingredients, in the
ie alternative, an ingredient statement giving the name of each
, together with the name of each and total percentage of the
in the product.
25, 1961, a consent decree of condemnation and forfeiture was
United States Marshal was ordered to release the units in


to the Toledo


Community Chest,


Toledo,


Ohio,


for their


'*/'-'
i^l


The product,







274


INSECTICIDE,


INDEX


FUNGICIDE,


TO NOTICES
N.J. No.


Agsco 300 Ester, A Weed
Killer
Agsco Chemicals, Inc ....
All-Night Mosquito Lotion
Chambers Laboratory .-
Auto Flo Permanent Washable
SAr iter with Built-In
Germ Kiling Power
AuoFlo Corporationr
Brisk Atr Sanitizer
Chase Products Co -....
Burton Brand Pool Sanitiser
Burton Chemical Co., Inc.
W. A. Butler Co. Glycol Air
Sanitzer
Chem Tech, Inc_-__.___
C-Clear Br the Convenient
Treatment of Swimn-
mring Pool Water
Barron Sales Corp_.___,
Chioro IPO Granules
Jack Wilson Chemical Co_
Dixsoline
Dixie Chemical Co., Inc..
Fly Ban Insecticide Cord
C-Jay-C Chemicals, Ltd_
Glass Wax, Glass and Metal
Cleaner
R. M. Hollingshead Cor t.
Gold Seal Co., Inc,,-
I-Clear A Liquid Germicide
for Swimming Pool
Water
Barron Sales Corp ... .


346

344



351

334

350


347


338

336

345

332



342


33S


AND


RODENTICIDE


OF JUDGMENT


ACT


332-351


[I.F.R.I



N.J. ]


a--.

.1



H 'ii:
Lid. "'


Lawton Insect Killer Bomb 4I
Aerosol Corporation of ;'
the South ..- -.. -~
Norkem Malathion Grai Pr.o-
tectant _-____
De-Pester Western, Inc.. 333 3:.
RX Safe Air The Fragrapt
Room Refresher
Sanitizes
Lynwood Laboratories___ 348
Sanidine i*
Central Iodine, ..
Sani-Dine Iodine Sanitizer
and Disinfectant
Elwood Chemical Co..-- 341
Sano-Kol Chlorinated Sterili-
zer and Disinfectant ..
Elwood Chemical Co-... 341
Speedlite BF-811
Patek & Co------------- 337
Supre Macy Pool Water Puri-
fier
PoolCity Products, Ine__ 349 |
Surdeath Non-Toxic Pyrocide
Insect Spray 1
Aerosol Corporation of
the South.-...---..... 340 '
Tomac Permachem #21 -"
Permachem Corp 335
Tomac Permachem #51
Permachem Corp .... 335
WA B Co Insect Spray I
Chem Tech, Inc---- 347





I: II I
":




r ::. .... 4-.*. 4I" -



UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA



In I I lllllI lllllliMlllilllil limll

3 1262 08588 8385





.,.
.f. H..* -:.



t


II ;"...

.4:


.: I


.i"".
I.i .










-*











Nil









S. ." ....









'. .




... .





.

.i l "-







m mm mmmmm -
m a --