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:
AA00008500:00014

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
'p7.323j


44e


-$/4


N3,i FR.486-615


I; a September 1i5


UNITED


STATES


DEPARTMENT OF


AGRICULTURE


AGRICULTURAL


RESEARCH


SERVICE


PESTICIDES REGULATION DIVISION


NOTICES OF


JUDGMENT UNDER THE FEDE


INSECTICIDE, FUNGICIDE, AN
RODENTICIDE ACT A


Nos.


486-515 .
iii:


*The following notices of judgment
District Courts and are approved fo
the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and


relate to cases a*
ir public top as 1
1 Rodent iiddfAct 6)
Vil t*1 /
S;7N &


5 di etrntAW'
Admin4 iatrc4&tarif/y


WAS
48a


,RITTmCron DC


Vnrlau; hir 27 19(11


Lack of registration of "CHAPERONE REPEL-O-ROPEE "CHAPERONE
OUTDOOR REPELLENT," and "CHAPERONE INDOOR REPELLENT"
U.S. v. 22 containers, more or less, of a product labeled m par, "CHAP-
ERONE REPEL-O-ROPE," 68 six-ounce containers, more or less, of a
product labeled in part, "CHAPERONE OUTDOOR RM'ELLBNT," and
.. 284 four and one-half ounce containers, more or less, of a product labeled
in part, "CHAPERONE INDOOR REPELLENT." Default decree of con-
demnation, forfeiture, and destruction. (I.F. & R. No. 529. I.D. Nos.
43526, 43527, 43528.)


The products
REPELLENTT"
tered under the
On April 24, 1
acting upon a ri
District Court
22 containers, m
O-ROPE," 68 si
"CHAPERON E


"CHAPERONE REPEL-O-ROPE,"


and "(
Federal
L963, the
report bJ
a libel
ore or 1
x-ounce


I


OUTD(


containers, more oj
REPELLENT," at
economic poisons w
1963, by Sudbury
It was alleged t
Agriculture as requ


"CH4PIRONE OUTDOOR


HAPERONE INDOOR REPELLENT," were not regis-
Insecticide, Fungicide, and RodeutilideAct.
United States Attorney for the District of Connecticut,
the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the United States
praying seizure for condemnation and confiscation of
!ss, of a product labeled in part, "OHAPERONE REPEL-
containers, more or less, of a product labeled in part,
)OR REPELLENT." and 284 four ,and one-half ounce


r less, of a product
Bridgeport, Conn
which had been trans
Laboratory, from
hat the products w
ired by section 4 of t


labeled
., and
porteed
Sudbur


n part,
alleging
iterstate
Mass..


ere not registered
he act.


"CHAPERONE: INDOOR
tha thie products were
op or about Febtrury 11,
in violation of the act.


with the Secretary


On July 29, 1963, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condenmation, for-
feiture and destruction was entered and the United Statee Miashal was ordered
to destrov thep nmrnd u




" "(.1






398


INSECTICIDE,


FUNGICIDE,


AND


RODENTICIDE


ACT


[N.J., I.LF.


condemnation and confiscation of 1 dram, containing
of a product labeled in part "AVA-KIL IRRITANT
Ind., and alleging that the product was an economic
transported interstate on or about March 27, 1963, by
from Portsmouth, Ohio, in violation of the act.
It was alleged that the product was not register
Agriculture as required by section 4 of the act.
On September 9, 1963, no claimant having appeared,
forfeiture and destruction was entered, and it was or
destroyed.


55 gallons, more or less,
NO. 7109," at Richmond,
c poison which had been
the ArChem Corporation,


with


the Secretary


a decree of condemnation,
dered that the product be


488. Lack of registration of "SNAKE-STOP." U.S. v. 40 one-pound containers,
more or less, of .a product labeled in part "SNAKE-STOP." Default de-
cree of condemnation, forfeiture and destruction. (I.F. & R. No. 564.
I.D. No. 44513.)


The product "SNAKE-STOP" was not registered un
cide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.
On September 6, 1963; the United States Attorney fo
: chusetts, acting upon a report by the Secretary of
United States District Court a libel praying seizure foi
tfiscation of 40 one-pound containers, more or less, of a
"SNAKE-STOP," at Boston, Mass., and alleging that 1
nomic poison which had been transported interstate on
by Animal Repellents, Inc., from Griffin, Ga., in viola


der the Federal Inseeti-


ir the District of
Agriculture, filed
r condemnation a
t product labeled
the product was
or about August
tion of the act.


Massa-
in the
nd con-
in part
an eco-
5, 1963,


It was alleged that the product was not registered with the Secretary of Agri-
culture as required by section 4 of the act
On October 21, 1963, no claimant having appeared, a decree of co(ndemnitlui
forfeiture and destruction was entered and it was ordered that the United
States Marshal destroy the product.
489. Lack of registration of "SNAKE-STOP." U.S. v. 232 one-pound containers, Ai
more or less, of a product labeled in part "SNAKE-STOP." Default de- ,
cree of condemnation, forfeiture and destruction, (I.F. & R. No. 573.
I.D. No. 42877.) "
The oduct "NAKE O" was not registered unde e ra
eide, FungiCide, and Rodenticide Act.
On October 18, 1963, the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of
Missouri. Eastern Division, 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 232 one-pound containers, more or less, of a product labeled
in part "SNAKE-STOP," at St. Louis, Mo., and alleging that the product was an
economic poison which had been transported interstate on or about July 23,
1968, by Animal Repellents, Inc., from Griffin, Ga., 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 January 24, 1964, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation,
forfeiture and destruction was entered and it was ordered that the United
States Marshal destroy the product.
490. Lack of registration and misbranding of "CALMAL 7.5." U.S. v. 39 one-
gallon containers, more or less, of a product labeled in part, "CALMAL
7.5." Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture, and destruction. (I.LF.
& R. No. 568. I.D. No. 44176.) ,|
a...uu~ ... S ---- -


ed






4&6-515 ]


aa aN~Ti 4 2EB 9?1


:r11:


399


caQix oSirora on, from Ifaleah, Fla.,


d e teiterM
rod uct was n eit afit]d
o the^ tIt eis btti
.. i I' ^ ; *- ** i '* ^ l


with


thee Sedftary


on or about May 24, 1963, by Arr
in violation of the act.
It was alleged that the product
Agriculture as required by section 4 o
It was further alleged that the p
of the act in that the labels affixed t
an ingredient statement g ify the
dient, together with te phLprced
or, in the alternati gedi
Ingredient, togehar i the| ae
ingredients, in the produL
On October 28, 1963, no claim
and forfeiture was entered, and t
destrov the nronduIt


a decree of cOndemnation
Marshal was ordered to


49- -a-r f-ai -s,
491. Lack of registration, lack of requireii information on the labels, and mis-
branding of "CMPP-2(4-CHLORO-2-METHYL-PHENOXY) PROPIONIC
ACID." U.S. v.4 five-ggl on cotainers, re o less, of a product labeled
in part "CMPP-2(4-CHILORO4METHYL~- NOXY) PROPIONIC
ACID." Default deree of condemnation forfeiture and destruction.
(I.F. & R. No. 5Z I.D. N 42186J.)
The product "OMPPF2(4-HILOROB24METHYNCtIPHNOXY) PROPIONIC
AOID" was not registered under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Ro-
Gwtig4e. Act. An examination of the product showed that the labels affixed
to t e cobtaitiers did no bear an ingredient statement or directions for use.
O tber 18s, 1963 the tUniited State' Attoiney for the Eastern District of
b ersouthern a8iis Lo acting upoSt a report by the Secretary of Agri-
filed in the TUrited States Ditrict Couirt a libel praying seizure for
Stn and confiscation of 4 fiv-gallon ctainers, ore or less, of a
product labeled in part "COMPP-2(4-CHRaO- -ME tII P n erNOXY) PROPI-
ONIC ACID," at Farmington, Mich., annd alleging that the product was an eco-
nomic poison which had been imported n or about September 6, 1963, from
May & Baker (Canada) Limited, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, in violation of
the act
It was alleged that the product was not registered with the Secretary of Agri-
cultre sw ybied by section 4 of the act.
wi t alleged that the nrodnet wF.a mtnhbrlandli within +th mnani4


of t act in that the labels borne by the product did not bear an ingredient
gate tg wing, the name and percentage of each, active ingredient, together
with the total percentage of the inert ingredients, in the product, or, in the
a Avea nedient statement giving the name of each active ingredient,
togetfttbe name of each and total percentage of the inert ingredients,
in the product
It was further alleged that the product was misbranded within the meaning
of 4e 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 December 2, 1963, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation
and eture was entered and the United States Marshal was ordered to
destroy the product
*
492. Lack of required information on the label and misbranding of "ALGAE-
RUDy. U.S.pv. 149 one-gallon containers, more or less, of a product la-
be int in pafl SALAMIID, S UDefault decree of condemnation, forfeiture
and Jestructin. (L.t & R. No. 5T7. ID. No. 42360.)


ii


the meaning
did not bear,
active" tigre-
the product,
'each active
(A the inert






INSECTICIDE,


FUNGICIDE,


AND


RODENTICIDE


ACT


[N.J.,


I.F.R.


It was alleged that the product was misbranded within the meaning of the
act in that the labels borne by the product did not bear an ingredient state-
ment giving the name and percentage of each active ingredient, together with
the total percentage of the inert ingredients, in the product, or, in the alternative,
an ingredient statement giving the name of each active ingredient, together with
the name of each and total percentage of the inert ingredients, 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
necessary and, if complied with, adequate for the protection of the public.
It was further alleged that the product was misbranded within the meaning
of the act in that its label did not bear a warning or caution statement which
may be necessary and, if complied with, adequate to prevent injury to living
man or either vertebrate animals, -.i
On December 13, 1968, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemna-
ton and forfeiture was entered and the United States Marshal was ordered to
destroy tfh product.
493. Lae registration and misbranding of "CYCLO FORMULA HM PASTE
S" U.S. v. 70 one-quart containers, more or less, 36 one-half gallon
containers, more or less, and 6 one-gallon containers, more or less, of a
product labeled in part, "CYCLO FORMULA HM PASTE WAX." De-
fault decree of condemnation, forfeiture and release to a charitable in-
stituition. (I.F. & R. No. 584, J.D. No. 42398.)
The Hd_ -.G FORMULA HM PASTE WAX" was not registered under
the Fed A Tsecide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. An examination of
the, prodUt showed that the labeling bore statements which were false and
misleading sp product would not act as a disinfectant for floors as claimed
and B lels affixed to the containers of the product did not bear
an ig testatqis required by the act.
On na 8, t e United States Attorney for the District of Oregon,
actig report bythe Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the United States
District a ibel prayiFng, izure for condemnation and confiscation of 70
one-qui oEtntainers, hmeo or ss, 36 one-half gallon containers, more or less, and
6 one-gallo containers, more or less, of a product labeled in part, "CYCLO FOR-
MUILA HM PASTE WAX," at Portland, Oregon. and alleging that the product
was an economic poison which had betn transported interstate on or about
@eptewe 27,"96; b 90stal be cal" Co., from Garfield, N.J., in violation
of tUb .t. .
It g atit-Aga itd t was not registered with the Secretary of
Agriculture as requi ejtion 4 of the act.
It wag il ege thai thet was misbranded within the meaning of the
act in thatits ae ling hore the itateients :


S .i.i 3. jpTORMULA
PASTE WAX
i"? ii ^ if 'A
-' **--* NA ~ y V A A


eth built4h ~etergent


cleans as it waxes


INOLUXDES SLIP RESISTANT FEATURES
APPROVED BX UNDERWRITERS LABS.


~, EaEEE
iii.ii
.I;
"B,: :E ~iiiE~:;:::EEiiS
ti


~4
~ -


I





4S6i-5151


NOTICES


OF JDGMRNT


401


FOR USE ON ANY KIND OF FLOQU
NO MORE STRIPPING, SORUBBIN G
CLEANS AND WAX AT THE SAMZ ]i
ELIMINATES MOPS.BUCKETS.SO
SAVES ON MAINTENANCE.
LASTS LONGER.
GOES FURTHER.
SHINES BETTER
EXTREMELY ECONOMICAL.


AND


ATE RI SING.
WATER.


S *0,


and such statement was false or misleading since it implied or represented that
the product, when used as directed on floors, would act as a disinfectant;
whereas, in truth andin tfat, tlheprodaety,hen used as directed on floors, would
not act as a disinfectant.
as rather alleged that theproduct was misbranded within the meaning of
the act in that its labels did riot bear dni tngreient statement giving the name
and percentage of each active ingredient, -itgether with the total percentage of
the inert ingredients, in the product, or, in the alternative, an ingredient state-
ment giving the name of each active ingredient, together with the name of each
and total percentage of the ineit in~griq therodtet.
On February 24,1964, a~, imait t jpearp decree of condemnation
rfeiftrewas entered, and the United States 1atshal was ordered to dis-
tabaie the proaict toiia aritAbt istfttfit iln ftfrmity with the rules and
actkice usual in such cases.
Lack of registration and misboanding uB -IO BIRD REPELLENT."
lW. v. 6 farty-pou d containers, amrar ler s, of, a product labeled in
prt "BUR-CO BIRD REPELLENT' Defalt decree of condemnation,
forfeiture and destruction. (ILF. & R. o. 592. LD. No. 44577.)
PThe product "BUR-CO BIRD REPELLENT" was not registered under the
Federal Insecticide, Fungieide, and Roderiticie Act. An examination of the
jqducpt showed that the labels tIrne by the product did not bear an ingredient
statement as required by the act.
a wtout January P27, 1964, the United Attorney for the District of Rhode
IsIan, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the United
States District oaurt a praying seiMng for condemnation and confiscation
G forty-pound4 containers, more or less, of a produietJ labeled in part "BUR-CO
BIRD REPELLENT," at Oumberland, R;I., and alleging that the product was


~::::

~E:::.


~IE









E~ili"

IIIE:


at eConomic poison which had been transported interstate, on or about Octo-
ber 15, 1963, by the Bfurr Chemical Company, from Rockford, Ill., in violation
of the act. i
It.~ alleged that the product was not reistered with the Secretary of
ai It was further alleged that the product was mis~ib ended within the meaning
of the act in that the labels affixed to the containers of the product did not bear
anJgredient statement giving the name and percentMge of each active ingredient,
together with the total pircentait of ithe t rt Thgredients, in the product, or,
ihtrna*.~, ingierit statement giving the name of each active in-
gredien, together with the name of eachaind percentage of the inert in-
aeeddetsj the 6dfot.n oa
On April 13, 1964, no claimant having appearddre otf condemnation and
forfeiture was entered, and the United & tei MarEal was ordered to destroy

anr y p.. 0T n. nrr r. r'n. nn i r






"d2


INSECTICIDE,


FUNGICIDE,


AND


RODENTICIDE


ACT


[N.J., I.F.B.


States District Court a libel praying seizure for condemnation and confiscation
of 6 forty-pouci d&ntainers, more or less, of a product labeled in part, "BUR-
CO BIRD REPEDDANT," at Providence, R.I., and alleging that the product
was an economic poison which had been transported interstate, on or about
September 9, 19638, by the Burr Chemical Company, from Bockfard S"il.,A
violation of the act.
It was alleged that the i ~ not registered with the Secretary of
Agriculture as required by section ; o the act. .
It was further alleged that the prpdct was misbranded within the meaning
of the act in that the Mabels aRflMd t th containers of the product4l
bear an ingredient statement giving the name and percentage of each active
ingredient, together with the i tt peroe gaf the inert ingredients, in the
product ort, in the alternative, an ingredient statement giving Sfe Ma;
active ingredient, together with the name of each and total percentage of he
inert ingredients, 11 thep roubi i
(On April 13, 196, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation and
forfeiture was entered, and the ted es Mahal was ordered to destroy
the product. (
496. Laek of registralip T4o 4qire info nation, and misbranding of
'"BAN-O-BIUG LINDANE VAPORIZING UNITS." U.S. v. 47, more
or less, "BAN-0-BUG DRY LINDANE VAPORIZING UNITS." Default
decree of condemnation, forfeiture Uad dpstreup3t (IF. & R. No: 578.
I.D. No. 44701.)
S


The product "f N-O-BUG DRY LTNDANE VAPORTZTNG UNIT
registered uider I jedera Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide
examination of t t te iabeed to the cor
the pbduit did ot eai r afa-temnent, a statement of
or measure o the dotetesn, % a or caution statement as rn
the act.
On November 1, 1963, the UJi Mt States Attqrney o the District of
acting ulpon i.. a^ "Jpho "~iBu-E "saijL LOII UL
acting upon a report by the Saqtara of Agricultuir filed in e U)
District Court a libel praying seizure for coandewatton and confi
47, more or les, ?BANL-O-UG/ fRY LINDANE VAPORIZING U
Omaha Nebr, and alleging tat theproduct was an economic poison


;" was not
Act. An
itainers of
net weight
squired by
Nebraska,


scationi o
NITS," at
which had


been transported interstate, on about May 14, 1963, by Double M & J, Inc.,
from Wichita, Kans., in tvlatien of the act.
It was alleged that the product was not registered with the Secretary of
Agriculture as required by section 4 at the act.
It was further alleged that tbpip~didt was misbranded within the meaning
of the act in that the labels on its outside containers or wrappers did not bear
an ingredient statement givigi ti name and percentage of each active in-
gredient, together with the total p~rcetage of the inert ingredients, in the
product, or, in the alternate p, ai4ngredien statement giving the name of each
active ingredient, together with the na>e ot eh and total percentage of the
inner ingredients,, in theipro p.i,
It was further allge ~that the prquct faid to comply with the provisions
of the act in that its la>s its td containers or wrappers did not bear
a warning or caution statemEnt iay be necessary and, if complied with,
adequate to prevent injury to living man or other vertebrate animals.
It was further alleged, that "t e product failed to comply with the provisions
of the act in that the labels on Ie containers or wrappers did not bear
a statement of the net weight or measure of the contents of the containers.
fl.., fl n n an 4 0 "\Oi r ..- -. al a JL t a.-j- -a-- -... _-_ 1 -a__ A .2 a--_a A. '--






486-515]


a -NOt n IS -OF


JUDGMENT


#08


trained less than 25% ot the gamma isomer of benzene hexahloride (from
lindane). The labeling of the prlut dfail to bearradequate directionsfcruse
or an adequate warning or caution statement and the product when Used as
directed or in accordance with commrnoly recognized practice, it would be
injurious to living man orbteirveteb tre animals.
On December 26, 1968 the IJited States Attorney for the District of Massa-
chusetts, acting upon a re~w by the Seretary of Agriculture, filed in the United
States District Court a libel praying ~le for Condemnation and confiscation
of 2a one-pound containers, more or less, of a froct labeled in part "STAUF-
FER CHEMICALS (LINDANIE -W' at estCoudord, Mass., and alleging that
the product was an economic poison 'hldzhad ben transported interstate on or
....out July 1, 1963, by Stauffer Chemat Copal ohy, from Bayonne, N.J., in
violation of the act.
It was alleged that the product was iSbranded within the meaning of the act
im that its labeling bore the statement:
I z t< '


ACTIVE INGREDIENT:
SI aina i semer of Benzene Hex' eldrile (froi lindane) z
INERT INGREDIENTS:' ..- -- -m -* -: -m -. -- mm- -
*a:" r ,.& IJ im i-r ~ i A il i -, -. ,-- ^ ... ^ -


Th


25%
75%


100%


*.E" ,
twaE fthhstttiient was false or sledir since it implied or represented that
the product contained only one atwve mgredment gamma isomer of benzene hexa-
chloride ffrom lindane), and that the pieuct contained 25% of the gamma
w benzene hetachloride (fom lindazndj) whereas, in truth and in fact,
i tt conitkl hiidditional active ingredients, namely endrin and dichloro
diphenyl tichlordethianB, and the prolicet contained less than 25% of the gamma
isomer of benzene hexachloride (from fldane).
!tr iwats further alleged that the product s adulterated within the meaning
SAIh act in that iba strength or purity fell below the professed standard of
quality as :expressed on its labeling, and other substances, namely dichloro
trlooethae and endrin, had been substituted in part for the article.
W4 tffather 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 fr the protection of the public.
Surther alleged that the product was misbranded within the meaning of
~ in :that te product, when used as directed or in accordance with commonly
recognized practice, would be injurious t lining man or other vertebrate animals.
It was further alleged that the product was misbranded within the meaning
Sthe b in;that its label did not bear a warning! r caution statement which Is
ecesafl An, I empited with, adequate to ptevent injury to living man or other
vertebrate animals.
<"-i July ;0-9G4) no claimant having appe d, d decree of condemnation and
forfeiture was entered and the United StailsM hal was ordered to: festrqy
the product.
Sregistrati of EFIDE VAPORIZER' inits,
*aco "E A FIL'L )tY-VER. .AUTOMATIC VAPOR-
E*r and lacf ofre'quired intfo md miimabrandin ig of "DR-FLY-
ER INSECTICIDE VAPORIZER;" s. IS. .A4, more or less, '"D-
FLY-ER INSECTIOIE AE units and 36 one-pound con-
INSEC..... AIflA nr.w na n -n lr r-y W flA.







404


IPSECTICIDE,


FUNGICIDE,


AND


RODENTICIDE


ACT


[N$~ ISA


OrDember 19,,198, ~UPt,* Uniettatn tmerfo the t o
aotingtlpon a report by the 'Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the United States
District Court a libel pyg oM nti sad coa aj t
more or les, "DE-FLY-ER INSECTICIDE VAPORIZER" units, ad
ounce containers, more or less, of "CHEMICAL REFILL FOR DE-FLY-ER


AUTOMATIC VAPORIZER," ,t FoLn hiay, and all'
nets were econaie ains which ha d bentranuported int
March 2S Aprtil 30, May 14, Jin itl. J y 1, 1@98, by D
Flint, Mich., in violationolf tke a .
It was alleged that the "DE-FLY-ER INSECTICIDE V


wins *t Op pp&
estate on or about
e Bug-fr. 4 c ,4.
r 0a


were misradea waiiin heaaiig sie act in hat The labels on tweir out-
side containers or wrappers noar a ingreitatement giving the name
and percentage of each active ingredient, together with the total percentage of the
inert ingredients, in the prou ,. VM the alternative an ingrdipenta s lE
giving the name of each active ingredient. together with te a me
total percentage of the inert ingredients, in the product.
It was further alleged that the "DI-FLY-ER INSECTIIDE VAPOR
units failed to comply with the provisions of the act in lt th the
outside, containers or wiwpperMsdid uoti bear a statement the e ateight or
measure of the coenets of the containers. 4,
On January 31, 1964, a consent decree for condemnation was entered tnd! te
United States Marshal was ordered to destroy said prodts and containers.
499. Lack of registration of "BAN-O-BUG DRY LINDANE VAPORIZING
UNITS" and"fBAN O-BUG LINDANI PELLETS" and lack of required
information and misbrandi;baf "BAi-OBUG DRY [NJ ANNR
IZING UNITS," IU.S. v. 8M more or less, "BAN-O-BUG DRY.
VAPORIZING UNrS" and, 9 cartons, more or less, ontainig,
"BAN-O-BUG LINDANE PELLETS." Default decree of condemnation,
forfeiture and destruction. (LF. & R. No. 577. I.D. Nos. 42899, 42900.)
The products "BAN-O-BUG DRY LINDANE VAPORIZING UNITS" and
"BAN-O-BUG LINDANE PELLETS" were not registered under the Federal
Insecticide, fungicide, and Rodentifide Act. An examination of the "BANO--
BUG DRY LINDANE VAPORIZING IUNITS" showed that the labels affixed to
the containers of the product did not bear an ingredient statement, a statement
of the net weight or measure of the contents of the contained, or a warning or
caution statement.
On November 5, 1963, the United states Attrneyfor the District of Nebraska,
acting upon a report by the Seeretary of Agriculture, filed in the United States
District Court a libel praying seizure for co'demn nation and confiscation of 83.
more or less, "BAN-O-BUG DRY LINDANE VAPORIZING UNITS." and 39
eartons, more or less, containing forty *'BAN-O-BUG DINDANE PELLETS',, at
Omaha, Nebr., and alleging that the products were economic poisons which had
been transported interstate on or ahout May 4, 1963, by Double M & J, Inc., from
Wichita, Kans., in violation of the act.
Inr Tnn 44,n4' 14.n, ira.naie. rrnrn,- wn/w# nfai.an r # I + hn Q a,. nnf a .n af


wa s ww ege~t~:M aJn eHA proj u:csu^ werec. no~/i rC^^egsere
A g riemhmm ^ *:-:t ur.e^^ ^.^^-. .has r equ.. ire d .ja ^*^-*'..... .j.^B b ...y s ejtk' *_ ^.S- *u rio 4 .*f th e a c t *^EJ Li.-.-^k **j^*


i L


It was further alleged that the "BAN-O-BTG DRY LI N DANE
UNITS" were misbranded within the meaning of the act in thai
their outside containers or wraIpp 4 dnot bear an ingredient
ing the name and percentage of ~~d active ingredient, together
percentage of the inert ingredients i theprodor,. in the.
ingredient statement giving the; ine i each active ingredient.


i nr 3U l t a L


VAPORIZING
t the labels on
statement giv-
with the total
alternative, an
together with
I =. .







4 86-51i5 1


NOTICES


OF JUDGMENT


405


Lack of registration and misbranding of "ULTRA LOW FOAMING DE-
TERGENT FOR WASHING EGGS." U.S. v. 159 twenty-five pound con-
tainers, more or less, of a product labeled in part "ULTRA LOW FOAM-
ING DETERGENT FOR WASHING EGGS." Consent decree of con-
demnation and release of product under bond for purpose of relabeling.
(LF. & R. No, 589. I.D. No. 44097.)


EGGS
dentic
to the
by the


product "ULTRA LOW FOAMING DETERGiENT FOR WASHING
," was not registered under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Ro-
ide Act and an examination of the product showed that the labels affixed
containers of the product kid not bear an ingredient statement as required
act.


~,,


























::"


February 4, 1964, the United States Attorney for the District of New
acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the United
Ditrict Court a libel praying seizure for condemnation and confisca-
1591 twenty-five pound containers, more or less, of a product labeled in
pag LTIRA LOW FOAMING DETERGiENT FOR WASHING EGGS," at
idhld, N.J., and alleging that the product was an economic poison which had
bee transported interstate on or about July 1963, by the Camp Chemical
Company, Inc., from Brooklyn, N.Y., in violation of the act.
It was alleged that the product was not registered with the Secretary of
tgieulture as required by section 4 of the act.
Ift was further alleged that the product was misbranded within the meaning
the act in that its labels did not bear an ingredient statement giving the
fame and percentage of each active ingredient, together with the total per-
tagef the inert ingredients, in the product, or, in the alternative, an in-
Fiedietnt statement giving the name of each active ingredient, together with the
name of each and total percentage of the inert ingredients, in the product.
4np C hemical Company, Inc., Brooklyn, N.Y., claimed ownership of the
ptut for the purpose of relabeling the product and bringing it into com-
rase ~wth thhe act and consented to the entry of a condemnation decree.
o March 30, 1964, a decree of condemnation was entered, and it was ordered
thai the product be released to the claimant.
501. Lack of registration of "CP BRAND THIODAN ZINEB SULFUR 3-6-50
DUST," "CP BRAND THIODAN ZINEB 2-6 DUST," "CP BRAND THIO-
DAN ZINEB SULFUR 2-6-50 DUST," "CP BRAND KELTHANE 3 DUST,"
"CP BRAND THIODAN SULFUR 3-50 DUST," "CP BRAND THIODAN
S IMEC," "MEWCO BRAND TIIIODAN 2EC," "CP BRAND MALATHION
<4A LB. E.C.," "CP BRAND TOXAPHENE 8 LB. E.GC," and "CP BRAND
PARATHION 4 LB. E.C." U.S. v. 82 fifty-pound bags, more or less, of
a"p BRAND THIODAN ZINEB SULFUR 3-6-50 DUST," 140 fifty-pound
bags, more or less, of "CP BRAND THIODAN ZINEB 2-6 DUST," 50
fifty-pound bags, more or less, of "CP BRAND THIODAN ZINEB SUL-
iFUR 2-6-50 DUST," 130 fifty-pound bags, more or less, of "CP BRAND
KELTHANE 3 DUST," 150 fifty-pound bags, more or less, of "CP BRAND
STHIODAN SULFUR 3-50 DUST," 12 one-gallon containers, more or less,
10 five-gallon containers, more or less, and 2 thirty-pound containers,
Sore or less, of "CP BRAND THIODAN 2EC," 6 five-gallon containers,
Smore or less of "MEWCO BRAND THIODAN 2EC," 16 one-gallon con-
..taiers, more or less, and 12 five-gallon containers, more or less, of "CP
RANDI ALATHION 8 LB. C.," 15 one-gallon containers, more or less,
9 five-gallon containers, more or less, and 2 thirty-gallon containers,
moe or less, of CP BRAND TOXAPHENE 8 LB. E.C." and 19 five-gallon


f~^lkbj
.C







406


INSECTICIDE,


FUNGICIDE,


AND


RODENTICIDE


ACT


[N.J..


I.F.R.


culture, filed in the aUnited States District Court a libel praying seizure for
condemnation and con~a nation of 82 fifty-pound bags, more or less, of "CP
BRAND THI A ZIN8F BULFUR 3-6-50 DUST," 140 fifty-pound bags, more
or less, of "0 BRAND THIODAN ZINEB 2-6 DUST." 50 fifty-pound bags, more
or les, of "CP RBfAND THIODAN ZINtB SULFUR 2-6-50 DUST." 130 fifty-
pound bags, more or less, of "OP BRANflBKELTHANE 3 DUST." 150 fifty-pound
bags, more or less of "OP BRAND THIODAN SULFUR 3-50 DUST,'' 12 one-
gallon containers, mqire or less, 10 five-gaflon containers. more or less, and 2
thirty-pound containers, more or less, of "CP BRAND THIODAN 2EC." 6 five-
gallon containers, more or less, of "MEWCO BRAND THIODAN 2EC.' 16 one-
gallon containers, more or less, and 12 five-gallon containers, more or less, of
"OP BRAND MALATHION 8 LB. .C.," 15 one-gallon containers, more or less,
19 five-gallon containers, more or less, and 2 thirty-gallon containers, more or
less, of "OCP BRAND TOXAPHENE 8 LB. E.C.,' and 19 five-gallon containers,
more or less, of "CP BRAND PARATHION 4 LB. E.O,," ~t Moses Lake. Wash.,
and alleging that the products were economic poi bni which had been trans-
ported interstate, on or about July 19, 1968, by Melville E. Willson Co., from
Madera, Calif., in violation of the act.
It was alleged that the products were not regitered with the Secretary of
Agriculture as required by section 4 of the act.
Central Fertilizers, Inc., Moses Lake, Wash., claimed ownership of the products.
requested their release under bond for the purpose of removing the products
from under the act, and consented to the entry of a condemnation decree. On
March 13, 1964, a decree of condemnation was entered, and it Was ordered that
the products be released to the claimant under bond for the purpose of removing
them from under the jurisdiction of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act.


Lack of registration and required information on label of
"P" CONCENTRATE." U.S. v. 49 fifty-five gallon drums,
of a product labeled in part "DECCOSOL "P" CONCENT
sent decree of condemnation and release of product under
pose of relabeling. (I.F. & R. No. 590. I.D. No. 45015.)


"DECCOSOL
i more or less,
RATE." Con-
bond for pur-


The "DEOCOSOL "P" ONENTRATE" was not registered under the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Roenticide Act and an examination of the product


showed that the labels affixed to the containers of the pr
statement of net weight or measure of the contents.
On March 27, i964, the United States Attorney for the
Washington, Southern Division, acting upon a report by the
ture, filed in the United States District Court a libel pra:
demnation and confistation of 49 fifty-five gallon drums.
product labeled in part DEOCOOSOL "P" CONCENTRATE
and alleging that the product was an emnomic poiBso wh
ported interstate, on or about October 1, 7, and 12, 1963. by
Inc., from Monrovia, Calif., in violation of the act.
It was alleged that the product was not registered wi
Agriculture as required by action 4 of the act.
It was further alleged that the product failed to comiply
of the act in that the labels affixed to the containers of


)duct did

Eastern
Secretary
ring seizu
more or
." at Yaki
uich had 1
' Wallace


th


not bear a


District of
of Agricul-
re for con-
less, of a
ma. 1'ash.,
been trans-
& Tiernan,


the Secretary


with the provisions
the liroduct did not


bear a statement of the net weight Or measure of the contents of 1
Wallace & Tiernan, Inc., Monrovia, Calif., claimed ownership o
request its release under bnd for the purpose of bringing it ii
* j .,.!- S* .> .. .. *:*


- -


containers.
the product,
compliance






48e;f51


NOTICES


JUDGMENT


407


, h Radektticide AdoL An examination o
borne by the product did not bear an ini
ash anwhm used as directed, the produce
kor sh e s
3O. Febrqary 3, 1964, the United States
aeitng u a rppoft By the Secretary of
District Court li bel praying !seizure for
sixteen onnce containers, more or less,
iNSTAiT BOIWL-A-RAMA SPRAY SHO
at Rkltville, Md., and alleging that the p
hadfen transrted interstate, on or a
ers CheCiMc4 Co., from Ransou, W.
as/ alleged tbat the product was
ricru1tire as required by 'section 4 of the
it was further alleged that the produce


f the product showed ,that the labels
greJient statement as required by the
At Would not act as an antiSeptic spray

Attorney for ,the District of Maryland,


Agriculture, filed i
condemnation and
of a product label
E DEODORIZER


product was an
Lbout October
Va., in violatl
not registered
act.


eco:
18,
on o
wit


n the United States
confiscation of 500
led in part, "NEW
AND SANITIZER"
nomic poison which,
1963, by the Funk-
f the act.


h the


Secretary


t 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 active ingredient, together with the total percen-
tage of the inert ingredients, in ,the product, or, in the alternative, an ingredient
statement giving the name of each active ingredient, ,together with the name of
each and total percentage of the inert ingredients, in the product.
It was further alleged that the product was misbranded within the meaning of
the act in that its labeling bore the statements:
"NEW
INSTANT
BOWL-A-RAMA
SPRAY
SHOE DEODORIZER
AND
SANITIZER
Antiseptic
Fungistatic
*


BOWL-A-RAMA
USES
U S ED FOR BOWLING
SHOES, ROLLER SKATES,
GOLF SHOES, STREET
SHOES AND OTHER
TY PES OF ATHLETIC
AND GYMNASTIC FOOT-
WEAR.


HE LPS PREVENT
LETE'S FOOT


ATH-


*t *l *


DIRECT
SHAKE BEFO

Remove protective cover
pushing down button
holding .can about 8"
sprayed. For most sati
short spray bursts: One


IONS
IRE USING


and hold can upright
with index finger
from shoe to be
factory results use
or two short sprays






408


INSECTICIDE,


FUYU I W


AND


RODENTICIDE


aCT


(N.J., I.P.R.


504. Misbranding of "COLGATE SPOT DISINFECTANT SPRAY." U.S. v. 140
one-pound containers, more or less, of a product labeled in part "COL-
GATE SPOT DISINFECTANT SPRAY." Default decree of condemna-
tion, forfeiture and destruction. (I.F. & R. No. 606. I.D. No. 45369.)
The product "COLGATE SPOT DISINFECTANT SPRAY" was misbranded
within the meaning of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
in that the labeling for the product bore false and misleading statements.
On May 12, 1964, theU TU States Attorney for the Ea'stern District of
New York, acting upn da report by the Secretary of Agriculture, d in A
United States District ot .a libel praying seizure for condemnanin and
confiscation of 140 one-poutl contaers more or less, of a product labeled in
part, "OOGIATE SPOS IJSINnQ.TANT SPRAY" at Brooklyn, N.Y., and
alleging that the product was an economic poison which had been transported
interstate on or about March 13, 164, by Colgate-Palmolive Company, from
Jersey City, NJ., in violation of the act.
It was alleged that the prodtet was Misbranged within the meaning of the act
in that its labeling bore the statements:


"CO LGATE
SPOT
DISINFECTANT
SPRAY
For Hospitals, Institutions,
Manufacturing Plants,
Public Places

Contains

permachem
LONG LASTING

PREVENTS MILDEW
KILLS ON CONTACT
MOST BACTERIA AND FUNGI

antiseptic effectiveness
US* *


Fully hospital tested for use as a surface sprty that
growth of bacteria, molds and fungi on the following :


Soiled Linen and Hampers
Spillage on Floors
Waste, Garbage and
Dressing Receptacles
On Fabrics not previously
treated with Permachem
Bed Pans and Urinals t
Storage Containers and
(lnra i


kills and inhibits


Mattresses
Patients' Clothing
brought from home
Furniture Upholstery
Drawers and Shelves
Toilets
Shoes and Slippers
Linen Carts
Da n*j a .. .





486-5151


NO6AICES OF


JUDGI4IN


409


i i DIRECTIONS
i: JJ-aia^ A i i
/' if': .* .


Hard Surfaces. Hold
valve firmly and spray u
Fabrics. Spray surface
welting, tufts and folds.


can about 15 inches from surface. Depress
ntil object is thoroughly moist.
's tbiroughly, especially concealed areas, seams,
Spray bh sides if possible.
-^ ~~ i *h. i* ii ; 1 "i '


Klls most bacteria
thlat oaf oiensive
sitclroom oi wdors

K ills oist bacteriaa in wa
receptacles. Reduces od


Lste
lors.


.^ .. -.. *i *.". 1
and such statement was false or misleading since it implied or represented that
the product, when used as directed; (1) wold disinfect the articles, places, and
surfaces specified in such statement, (2) would kill bacteria or fungi on contact,
and (3) would provide long-lasting effentieness after application; whereas, in
truth and in faet, the product, when used as directed, (1) would not disinfect
the articles, places, or surfaces specified in such statement, (2) would not kill
bacteria or fungi On contact, and (3) would zot~roTide long-lasting effectiveness
after application. : : !
On June 24, 1964, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation
and forfeiture was entered and the United States Marshal was ordered to
destroy the product.
505. Misbranding ani adulteration of "FARMRITE PRODUCTS 4% MALA<
THION DUST! U.S. v. 280 fifty-pound bags, more or less, of a product
labeled in part, "FARMRITE PRODUCTS 4% MALATHION DUST."
Consent decree of condemnation and release under bond for purpose of
reformulating. (I.F. & R No, 572. I.D. No. 43896.)
!thei tr6duct $ARMI RTEI RODU tS '4% MALATHION DUST" was
niibdranded in th)t its'iabnnig ihg s tatements which were false or misleading.
An examination hif the prtlducd showed thit two samples contained 2.78% and
2,60% of malathion instead of 4% of malathion, as claimed. Due to the
deficiencies, the product would be effective for the control of the insects named
add the diseases implied on the label.
On October 24, 1963, the United States Attoruey for the District of Delaware,
acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the United States
> 0ut a libel praying seizure for condemnation and confiscation of 280
fifty-pound bags, more r less, of a product labeled in part, "FAARRITE


PRODUCTS 4% MALATIdON DUST," at
the product was an economic poison which
or about May 8, 1968, by Central Chemical
in violation of the act. i x
Tt was alleged that the Droduct wis jmi
act in tat its labeling bore thestaitemete:

"FARMRRIT. P
4% MALATHIO


Bridgeville; Del., and alleging that
had been transported interstate on
Corporation, from Hagerstown, Md.,


within the meaning of the


branded



N DUST


1"i ,l'


*..


ACTIVE INGREDIENTS:




r


......


l


C






410


INSECTICIDE,


FIUNGIORDN,


AND


RODENTICIDE


ACT


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


Apply 7-10 day intervals or e de conditions become severe.
Use 30-40 pounds per acre, depending upon the crop, sie of plants and
severity of disease con ditions.
USE 4% MALATfION DUST ON: Tomatoes n& potatoes for control
of Spider Mites, Aphids and Leaf Mine On Tomatoes do not use later
than 3 days before hardest. Beans for control of Mexican Bean Beetle.
Mites, Leaf Miner, Thrips, Tarnished Plant Bug and Leaf Hopper. Do
not use later than 3 days before harvest Peas for control of Pea Aphid.
Do not use later than 3 days before harvest. Cabbage, Broccolli, Kale.
Mustard, Turnip for control of Aphids, Spider Mites, Leaf Miner, Cab-
bage Worms. Do not use later than 7 days before harvest. Cucumber,
Squash, Melon for control- of Aphids, Mites, Leaf Miner, and Squash
Bug. Do not use later than 1 day before harvest.
*t "
and such statements were false or misleading since they implied or represented
that the product contained 4.0% malathion and 96.0% inert ingredients and that
when used, as directed, it would be effective for the control of the insects named
and diseases implied in said labeling; whereas, in truth and in fact, the product
contained less than 4.0% malathion and more than 96.0% inert ingredients and
the product, when used as directed, would not control the insects named and
diseases implied in said labeling.
It was further alleged that the product was adulterated within the meaning
of the act in that its strength or purity fell below the profe standard O
quality as expressed on its labeling.
Central Chemical Corporation, Hagerstown, Md., claimed ownership of the
product, requested its release under bond for the purpose of reforhurlattg itba
bringing it into compliance with the act, and consented to the entry of acotde-
nation decree. On February 7, 1964, a decree of condemnationt wea 4rte, ani
it was ordered that the product be released to the claimant.
506. Misbranding and adulteration of "PAX PUNCH INSECTICIDE" U.S. v. 93
three and one-half pound containers, more or less, ad 08 seven-pound
containers, more or less, of a product labeled in part, "PAX PUNCH
INSECTICIDE." Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture and it was
ordered that the product be distributed to a charitable institution.
(IAF. & R. No. 580. I.D. No. 42372.)
The product "PAX PUNCH INSECTICIDE" was misbranded in th tts a
being bore statements which were false or misleading. An examination of the
product showed that three samples of the product contained 3.95%, 8.72% and
2.85% of aldrin instead of 4.92%, as claimed on the label.
On or about October 17, 1963, the United States Attorney for the Distrtc bf
Oregon, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the United
States District Court a libel praying seizure fort condemnation and confiscation
of 93 three and one-half pound containers,; more or less, and 08 seven-pound
containers, more or less, of a product labeled in part, "PAX PUNCH INSECTI-
CIDE" at Medford, Oregon, and alleging that the product w Rtan economic
poison which had been transported interstate on or about May 31 1961, by PAX
Company, from Salt Lake City, Utah, in violation ofthe act. : :
It was alleged that the product was misbranded within the meaning of the
act in that its labeling bore the statements: : :


"ACTIVE INGREDIENTS:
*Aldrin ~I----- -- --------------------
Yn ^ T M .r.^- -a i-


4. 92%







d4d-15]1


NOTICES


OF JUDGMENT


411


On March 13, 1964, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation
land forfeiture was entered and it was ordered that the United States Marshal
distribute the product to a charitable institution.
507. Lack of registration and required information on label of "L M POWDER."
1US. sv. 367 five-pound bag, more or less, of a product labeled in part
"L M POWDER." Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture and
destruction. (LF. & R. No. 509. ID. No. 42068.)


The product "L M POWDER" was not registered
ticide, F3ntgicide, and Rodenticid9 Act, and an exan
ladle afllxed to the product did not bear a statement of 1
of the contents.
On January 7, 1963, the United States Attorney for
Illinois, Southern Division, acting upon a report by the
filed in the United States District Court a libel praying
and confiscation of 367 five-pound:bags, more less, of
"L M POWDER" at Godfrey, Ill., and alleging that
noriw poision which had been transported interstate o
by GS. Robins and Company, from St. Louis, Mo,, in v
It was alleged that the product was not registered
Agriculture as required by section 4 of the act.
It was further alleged that the product did not con
the lables on its immediate containers did not bear a st
or measure of the contents of the containers.
On September 3, 1964, a default decree of condemn
was ordered that the United States Marshal destroy the


under the Federal Insec-
innation showed that the
the net weight or measure

the Southern District of
Secretary of Agriculture,
seizure for condemnation
a product labeled in part
the produce was an eco-
n or about June 28, 1962,
violation of the act,
with the Secretary of the
nply with the act in that
atement of the net weight


nation w
product.


as entered and it


508. Lack of registration of "CHIPMAN MIX." U.S. v. 40 fifty-pound bags,
more or less, of a product labeled in part "CHIPMAN MIX." Consent
fdgcree of condemnation and release of product to claimant for purpose
of .destruction. (I.F. & R. No. 542. LD. No. 42297.)
The produ t "OHI'PMAN MIX" was not registered under the Federal Insecti-
cide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.
On Jnne 19, 1963, the United States Attorney for the Western District of
W hhington, Southern Division, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agri-
culture, filed in the United States District Court a libel praying seizure for
coademnatiqn and confiscation of 40 fifty-pound bags, more or less, of a product
ble4 in Ipart "CHIPMAN MIX" at Tacoma, Wash., and alleging that the
product was an economic poison which had been transported interstate on
or about June 29, 1962, by Chipman Chemical Company, Inc., from Portland,
Oregon in violation of the act.
It was alleged that the product was not registered with the Secretary of
lUTre as required by section 4 of the act.
opm an Chemical Company, Inc., Portland Oregon, claimed ownership of
ti YOdut ind on September 17, 1963, a consent decree of condemnation was
td an the product was released to the claimant for destruction.
509. Misbranding of "SANI-FLUFF." U.S. v. 2 two-hundred pound containers,
more or less, of a product labeled in part "SANI-FLUFF." Consent
decree of condemnation and release under bond. (I.F. & R. No. 540.
I.D. No. 42283.)
An examination of the product "SANI-FLUFF," showed that its labeling bore
statements which were false or misleading.







412


INSECTICIDE,


FUNGICIDE,


AND


RODENTICIDE


ACT


[N..,., I.F.R.


"It's the h e
S :ANl-FLUFF
CONTAINS
NOX-GERM
L FABRIC CONDITIONING
AGENT 1. Use
USE BIRY-APPLY DIRECT 2. Fo
TO WUEZL per
GIV S A FIN SOFT FIN- 3. For
IS ; :For
CONTAIN A POTENTP BAC: use
TERIOSTATIC & PUNGI- clot
5. Ca n
*: ^ e i :,' lt


and suh statements were false o leading since they implied or represented
that, th product, when ed d re~ would impmrt bacteriostatic or fungi-
strtic properties to clothes; Wereas, the product, then used as directed, would
not impart baceriostatic or fungistuic prope to clothes.
Johnson Chemical Industries, In. BEltimore, Md., claimed ownership of the
wotict and requested its release ud~r bond for purpose of bringing it into
rompHance with the act and concerned to the entry of a condemnation decree.
On August 23, 1963, a consent decree of condemnition was entered and the prod-
net was released to the claimant under bbnd for the plrps.e of removing the
product fgox L uder the act. v .
510. Lak di repaired inormnri Aon i Tiresranding and adulteration of
MOiRtkO ROTE A GARDN DUSTI" U.S. v. 236 one-pound con-
tainers, more or less, of a product lIbeied in part, "MORGRO ROTE-
YONE GARDEN DUBST" Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture
and destruction. (I.F. & R. No. 563 ID. No. 43737.)
An examination of the proddu hiwed thal the labels affixed to tbe containers
of the product 4did not contain adequate directions for use, or a warning or cau-
tion statement The labele afflid to te contatners also bore statements which
were false or misleading sinre the priiOet contained additional active ingre-
dients, namely gauimna isomeitr ot benine herachloride and dichloro diphenyl
trichlforoethane, Which were nned in the:i figredient statement.
On September 18, 1963, the United States Atoriey for the District of Colorado,
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
236 one-pound containers, morq or less, of a product labeled in part "MORGRO
IOTEISONE GIARD N DUST," at Denver Colo., and alleging that the product
*a an eeddmlif poi nwhidh iad been transported interstate on or about March
6, 1968, by Wasatehi OhemicI company from Salt Lake City, Utah, in violation
of the.act
It was alleged that th Igpiduct was misbranded within the meaning of the
t in that italabeling bore the statement:


flu 911It


DIRECTIONS


FOR


USE:


dry to the wheel.
loads up to 0llb: use3 oz.
100 lb. dry weight clothes.
loads of more than 100 ib:
2 oz. per 100 lb. dry weight
hes.
be used in starch hath or
bath.
be used in automatic equip
Lt.


"INGREDIENTSi Rotenone
Other active extractives_ -
r I.


1 0"
2.0%


SgC)


i; B


-l






486-1515


NOIQES QF


43$


may be necessary and, if complied with, adequate to prevent injury to iving
man or other vertebrate animals.
It was further eleged that the produht w% ibramfde within the meaning
of the act in that if hbeliig d4. net pot1in directions for use which are
necessary and if complied wit h, adeqlJ fotp protectiop of the public.
On November 6, 1963, no claimant having appeared, a decree of condemnation
and forfeiture was entered and the United iStates Marshal was ordered to
destroy the product.
511. Lack of registration and imisbranding of "CLAYTON'S HOSPITAL DIS-
FECTANT DEOBORANT." Dfault decneE f condemnation, forfeiture
or less, of a product la bed in part CLAYTON'S HOSPITAL DISIN-
FECTANT DEODORANT. Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture
and destruction (LI. & a No. 550. I.D. No. 43865.)
The product "CLAYTON'S HOSPITAL DI$IN OECT'ANT DEODORANT" was
not registered under the Federal Insecticie, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.
An examination of the product showed that its labeling bore statements which
were false or mislealig.
On August 27, ,, tbe Una te(t atae torney for the astern. District of
North Carolina. acting upopi a report tfyate $eretary of Agriculture, filed in
the United States Ditrict Court a liTbel praying seizure for condemnation and
confiscation of 115 twnty-otnce containers, more or less, of a product labeled
in part "OLAYTON'S HIOSPItA1L ISINPFEOTANT DEODORANT" at Fayette-
ville, North Carolina, and alleging that the, product was an economic poison
which had 'been transported intterstate by Hysan Products Company from Chi-
cago, Ill., on or about April 26, 196, in violation of the act.
It was alleged that he product was not registered with the Secretary of Agri-
culture ,as required by~ tion 4 of the act.
It was further alleged that the product wa~ misbranded within the meaning
of the act in that its labelingtorethe s dtefents:
(Front Panel)
"TU B ERCULOCIDAI-STAPHYLOCIDAL
FU NGICIDAL--BACERICIDAL


OLAYTONS .
POWERFUL
QUICK-ACTING


Hospital
DISINFECTANT
DJIODORANT


(14Tjh


-V4
( $


Paie h)
This product will control the following orga-
nisms: Tuberele Bacilli, tSalionellaatyphosta,
Shigella : paradyentariae," Sn' o c.shotat-
muelleri, Escherichia Coi% Staphiococcus
aureus, Streptococus 'pyogenes, Mycobac-
teri-umi aegmtia, Trchphrtou ifterdigi-
tale, Penicilliurn glaum .i
This powerful HopitaI Disinfectant and
Dnarn t SaaT-on germa on turfa*e nch
..:14.. 1 "iT' 1 C~1f


"I "I" i
,"


,, ;g
,,,
Bi"
" It


XEEEEE..







INSEC~iID,


FUNGICIDE,


AND


RODENTICIDE


ACT


[N.J., I.P.t.


(uignt Panel) Pw ~tiI
For Disinfecting-
SHold dispenser upright about
J f from surface to be disinfected
3 seconds until surface Is wet.
i X:: 4 IrB;;r ;- :lJI )b *p


6" to 8"
and spray


and such statements were false or misleading since they implied or represented
that ~e product, whet used as directed, would disinfect the places, articles,
and asrufaes Hated in said labeling and would control the disease organisms
specified It Sid labeling; whereas, in truth and in fact, the product, when used
as directed, wou t fl disinfkfr 1ha&articles, and surfaces listed in said
labeling and would not control the disease organisms specified in said labeling.
On June 27, 1984, no cl ma4# eyJig appeared, a decree of condemnation and
forfeiture was enterid and lth. t tatds Marshal was ordered to destroy
the produ
512. Misbranding of "STERIL-RAY." U.S. r. five articles, more or less, labeled
in parta nTEIL-RAY." Default decree of condemnation, forfeiture,
and dbntrntion. (LF~ &fo ; SD. No. 42177.)
The article tBERII, w end p sterilize barber and beauty
shop tots. owqver, whe ite itearticle wqa found to be ineffective for
these punrposss.
O'n O tober 25 the kJn)I? SStes Attorney for 'the Northern District of
Illinois, Eastern Divisionatitg upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture,
filed in the Un4ed 8tes Diiqtc Court a liel praying seizure for condemna-
tion and confiscation of Ave titles, more or es, laled in part "STERIL-
RAY," at COeCago, 11t, Ma alleg thanratt economic poison
which had been transported mtertsa on or .a ..AiAgist 22 and October 29,
1962, by William Marry Company, fron St. Paul, Minn., in violation of the act.
It was alleged that the articles were misbranded within the meaning of the
act in that the labeling bore the statements:
(Device "'T tRIlAY -
Label) William
MAJtVY
CAUTION
BECAUSE THE LAMP IN THIS STERILIZER PRODUCES IN-
VISIBLE RAYS WHICH ABRE INJURIOUS, AVOID ANY EXPOSURE
OF THE FACE AND EYE TO ; POWERFUL SOURCE OF


ULTRA VIOLETr
DISCONNECT ELECTRICITY "BEFORE
ING TUBE.


Mfg. by: .Wilia.
St. i n '
MODEL NO. 10 S


INSTALLING OR REPAIR-


7 Co.
no.
No. 713


TO OPERATE-- .
Push Switeh hol nomentarily-then release.
TO TURN OFF-Push Switch Button
DO NOT LOOK AT LAMP TUBE


Whmn naeintrnu thian :nit mI


na ie 'prtnin fthnf- anrmn pvppflsARRP






486-515]


NOTICES

415


(Leaflet)


Now
sors,
La mi
unique
second

LET
YOU
AND
THE


KILLS BSE 0NYS
. kill bac "te bs v l&hp cs -
etc., in just seconds t GNeb err cil
With rays concentrated throqgb, our
le reflector desig. kills mere b r ia in
ds than aaeny q mknn etod

CUSTOMERS KNOW
ARE PR iPfi*ING EIR iIUALtH
INSURING THE LJHEANLINE S OF
INSTRUMEINTh I .E
< '^ **' rt .^ t r. ^ *^ : .


MARVY
GE GERMIi5tD
STERIL-R i
Deluxe
Deluxe 1
Finish

THE CLEAN IA
C U STOM ER H EBAi


and such statements were


that the articles, wh
kill all bacteria on
the term "etc.." (3)
'method, and (4) wo
in fact, the articles,
(2) would not kill a
implied 'by the term


en use
combs,
would
uld pr
, when
11 Fact
"etc.,"


other known method, and
On April 1, 1964, no clai
forfeiture was entered, an
the articles.


$S6.95

I<


TISPACTION"


false or riaiuienthey implied or represented
d'as d*,t& 1) ould :Cat as sterilizers, (2) weid
S'brnushes, ksi diis' tnall other articles implied by
kill mo Ir bA6tt n tetonds than any other known
:tect & ixfze ple's health; whereas, in truth and
used "& irited, (1) Would not act as steriliters,
eria on combs, brushes, scissors, and all other articles
(3) woula t hi mor bacteria in seconds than any
(4) Dwtu otfteet or insure people's health.
mant h |gy apjared a decree of condemnation and
d the UTJ4,t *ites iMarshaI was ordered to destroy


C


Lack of registration and
KILL FOR RATS AN
or less, of a product
MICE." Default deer
(I.F. & R. No. 594. LID


lack ocite

tee .


P. J29o1W u.


* T


information on labels of "SURE-
v. 20 one-quart containers, more
"SURE-KILL FOR RATS AND
tion, forfeiture and destruction.


The product "SURE-K ~ RA TS AND MICE" was not registered under
the Federal Insecticide,; ,& 7t Ro nticide Act. An examination of
the product showed that the labels affixed to tih ntainers of the product did
not bear a statement of the net weight or measure of the content.
On February 3, 1964, the United. ltgte Attorn for the Northern District
of Iowa, Western Divisiona, athi t Opth re rt by the hSeretary of Agriculture,
filed in the United States District Court a libel praying seizure for condemna-
tion and confiscation of 20 one-quart containerM tmre Qor ess, of a product
labeled in part, "SURE-KILL FOR RATS ANL ISyCE' a t Spencer, Iowa, and


;r






416


INSECTICIDE,


AND


RODENTICIDE


ACT


[N.J., I.F.E.


Lack of registration and misbranding of -IMPERIAL BF
GERMICIDAL ACTION SA TIZES FOR MA
WASHING," and "IMPERIAL TABLES GERP
TION SANITIZEiS L ** FOR MACHINE DISHW
v. 10 seventy-two pound containers, more or less, 16 si
tainers, more or less, and 5 forty-pound containers, mo
product Ibeled in part, "IMPERIAL BRIQUETS *
ACTION SANITIZES FOR MACHINE DI
and 3 forty-pound containers, more or less, o a product
"IMPERIAL TABLETS GERMICIDAL ACTIO
TIZES FOR MACHINE DISHWASHING." Defaul
demnation, forfeiture and destruction. (T.F. & R. No.
45435 and 45436.)


tIQUETS
LCHINE D
4ICIDAL
ASHING."
ixty-pound
re or less,
GERMICI
SHWASHI
labeled in


ISH-
AC-
U.S.
con-
of a
DAL
NG."
part


N SANI-
It decree of con-
597. I.D. Nos.


The products "IMPERIAL BRIQj OtiS* GERlCTICDAL ACTION *
SANITIZES FOR MA$ DISHWASHING," and "IMPERIAL TAB-
LETS GERMICIDAL A. iON SANITIZES F* OR MA-
CHINE DISHWASHING," were ino registered upder the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. An reaintioof the product howed th
the labels affixed to the containers ofthe produvth did ot bear ingredient state-
ments or directions for use,
On March 13, 1964, the United Sta Attx6ey for the District of Connecticut,
acting upon a report by the SerertaW a Agiclture, filed in the United States
District Court a libel praying sefize f condemInaition and confiscation of 10
seventy-two pound containers, more or iee, 16 sixty-pound containers, more o
less, and 5 forty-pound contaiiers, moniobr less, Qf a product labeled in part,
"IMPERIAL BRIQtIETS GERMEIDAL OK ION SANITIZES
* FOR MACHINE DISHWASHING' and orty-pound containers, more
or less, of a product labeled in part, i'IMPERIAL TABLETS GERM-
ICIDAL ACTION SANITIZEBS FOR MACHINE DISHWASH-
ING," at Hartford, Conn., and allegig that the products were economic poisons
which had been transported interstterstate n or abpt Juary 17, 1964, by Cavalier
Chemical Co., Inc., from Brooklyn, 4.,m riation a the act,
It was alleged that the products were not registered with the Secretary of
Agriculture as required by section 4 of tiah et.
It was further alleged that the prqdt were mibranded within the meaning
of the act in that their labels did not bear an ingredient statement giving the
name and percentage of each active itldient, together with the total percentage
of the inert ingredients, in the productS, or, in the alternative, an ingredient
statement giving the name of each active ingredient, together with the name of
each and total percentage of the inert ingredients, in th products.
It was further alleged that the produetwee mwe alrtae thin the meaning
of the act in that their labeling di not eomtaip ireetionp for use which are
necessary and if complied with, adg3e rt toitheottiao of the public.
On July 30, 1964, no claimant having appeared, decree of condemnation was
entered, and the United States Marshal was ordered to destroy the products.
515. Lack of registration and misbrddig "AYI-GL DEODORIZER AIR
: SANITIZER GERMICIDE," T S, 620 fourteen-ounce containers, more
or less, of a product labeled irwt, "AYR-GJ IDEODORIZER AIR
SANITIZER GERMICIDES D. 1E-4 ee ordering release of product
to charitable institution. (LF.& B. Na 86, I.D. No. 45813.)
The product "AYR--O DEOtER Ait SANITIZER GERMICIDE."
was not registered under the F'edelt TuInpeticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide


IC"~~,






48-5151 NOTICES OF
II
Mf.


It was
Agricultu
' It was
of the act





THE


JUDOMENTI


417


alleged that the product wa 6tt registered with the Secretar;
ire as required by section 4 o
further alleged that the piodu Was misbraded within the mea
in that its labeling bore the statements:
iaprbved! :
Now Qaeins 100%

Active Ingredients Than Beforeo
GLYCOLIZED MULTI-PUlTPS DEiSRIZER-GSirGTCIDE-
SANITIZER FOR HOSPITALS, I HOlteS, ISTITUTTIONS,
SCHOOLS, OFF CE MOTELS, HOMES


Ayer- 1lo


'DEODORIZ
AIR T


DIRECTIONS FOR UBSE IN -~IE HOME
./


BATHROOM S:
After routine cleaning
TIZER on toilet bowl,
disinfect.


of fixtd es ay this, DEODORIZER AIR-ANI-
seat, lavatt ro tub,; b't Aower stall thoroughly to
|F *g *~ **,,. *. '- .


DIRECTIONSiFOR USE
Always hold dispenser upright., Pofnt opening away from face when press-
iug button. It will keep sickrooms, Ifi8tting.rooms, etc. with a refreshigly
clean and Sanitized odor that ligers for many tars.


This product contains the i;
PROPYLENE GLYCOL which
from air-borne micro-organism
infection by air-borne bacteria


ngreadis TRIETHiYLENE
empbitiicly educess the dang
S. .If sprayed it will reduce
a viruses idutfiam e the air
* *i *


GLYCOL and
er of infection
the hazard of
more pleasant.


and such statements were false or misleading since litey impliea or represented


that the product, when used as


seats, lavatories, bath
hospitals, hotels, instit
reduce the hazard of
the product, when use
seats, lavatories, bath
hospitals, hotels, instit
reduce the hazard of


tubs, and
:utions, sc
infection
d as direct
tubs, or sh
ut ions, sch


directed (1) would disinfect
shower stkts, s2) wntdd act
hooa ote, mett tnd horn
front ailne-baoria and
ted: i(t) would iMt disinfect
lower sta SW (2)-would not acd
lools,,offces, motels or homis,;


toilet bowls, toilet
as a germicide in
es, and (3) would
viruses; whereas,
toilet bowls, toilet
t as a germicitde sn
and (3) would not


infection frqm aiitBrenehateria or viruses.


On June 24, 1964, no claimant having appeared, a default decr<
ordering that the product be released to a charitable institution.


ee was entered


INDEX TO


NOTICES OF


JUDGMENT


486-515


N.J. No.


AlReR
Thiofl (Thendrrni en


N.J. No.


Ban-O-Bug Lindane Pellets
T"lhi ln t T fl Tr-n


y


tnig


I" / '






41$


INSECTICIDE,


FUNGICIDE,


AND


RODENTICIDE


ACT


[N.J., LF.R.


V 3
CP Brand Malathion 8 Lb. E.C.
Melville fl Willson Co-___...
CP Brand Parathion 4 Lb. E.C.
Melville E. Willson Co_--_- -
CP Brand Thiodan Sulfur 3-50
Dust
Melville E. Willson Co ........
OP Brand Thiodan 2 E.C.


Melvill E illson
CP Brand oa Z
3-6-50 St
Melville E. WillUs
CP Brand Thiodan
Dust
Melville E. WiIlsol
CP Brand Thiodan t
2-6-50
Melville E. Willson
CP Brand Toxaphende
Melville E. Willson
Calmal 7.5
almal Calmal C
American Calmal


Chaperone
Sudbury
Chaperone
Sudbury
Chaperone
Sudbury
Chemical


Co.---
ineb Su

-ineb.
Zineb


Co..,..-.a
PS~ Lb.
Oo,~~-

nrozpsa~tJ


q.J. No.

501

501

501


'a-


- -



Wunr

rn-l-


Lon ad


Indoor Repellent

Outdoor Repellent
Laboratory-_-- -
RepeltO-Rope
Laborellat fory D..e
Refill for Fly-Er


Automatic Vaporizer

Chipman Mix
Chipman Chemical Comany
Inc --..--.-----------.--.i--
C!layton's Hospital Disinfectant
Deodorant
Hysan Products Company_..,
Colgate Spot Disinfectant Spray
Colgate-Palmolive Compa y....._
Cyclo Formula HM Paste Wax
Coastal Chemical Co._.. _..
Deccosol "P" Concentrate
Wallace & Tiernan, Ine..._


N.J. No.


De-Fly-Er Insecticide Vaporizer
De-Bug-Er, Inc ....... _--
Farmrite Products 4% Malathion
Dust
Central Chemical Corporation.
Imperial Briquets Germi-
cidal Action Sanitizes
For Machine Dish-


U01 washing
Cavalier Chemical
Imperial Tablet *
101 cidal A c to n
timhe For
Dishwashing
S Cavalier Chemical
V~iZv y Ity ^ *


01
101


4 8


PUS4


811



49.

5 2


Co., Inc_ ..
* Germi-
* Sani-
Machine

Co., Inc._-


0. S. Robins and Company.....
Mweco Brand Thiodan 2 EC Mel-
ie Wilson Co...... ....
Mbrgo tenone Garden Dust
Wasatch Chemical Company_.
N 4wtant Bowl-A-Rama Spray
Se )eodorizer and Sani-
i The Funkhouser Chemical Co.
Pax PIineh Insecticide
Pix Cokpany- .. _-..... _
Sani-uff
Johnson Chemical Industries,
Iac ^-^-a-------- -- --------------------.---
Shikke-Stop
SAnimal Replets, Inc-
SnrMeStop ,
Animal Reellents, Inc.......
Stauffe Chemicals Lindane
25-W
Staffer Chemical Company___
Steril-Ray
Wlliam Marry Company.s.--
Sure-Kill for Rts and Mice
Great Northtwest Rodent Pest
Control and Associates..
Ultra LEw Foaming Detergent
for Washing Eggs
Camp Chemical Compan y,
Inc ---- --------- ---------


"iF





J"







H I II IIll lllli Elll1111i iE III I
3 1262 085886 8443
":*:
vvvvv~~~ ~ ~~~~~~ vv Av *:.** *^ ~ vvv~~~vvvv~~vvvvvvvv^