|
 |
| UFDC Home | Search all Groups | World Studies | Federal Depository Libraries of Florida & the Caribbean | Vendor Digitized Files | Internet Archive | | Help |
|
|
|
| UFDC Home | Search all Groups | World Studies | Federal Depository Libraries of Florida & the Caribbean | Vendor Digitized Files | Internet Archive | | Help |
 Material Information
Subjects
Notes
Record Information
Related Items
|
| 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|| 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 -- |