15 U.S.C. § 69b

Misbranded fur products

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 15 CasesGoogle Scholar

For the purposes of this subchapter, a fur product shall be considered to be misbranded—(1) if it is falsely or deceptively labeled or otherwise falsely or deceptively identified, or if the label contains any form of misrepresentation or deception, directly or by implication, with respect to such fur product;(2) if there is not affixed to the fur product a label showing in words and figures plainly legible—(A) the name or names (as set forth in the Fur Products Name Guide) of the animal or animals that produced the fur, and such qualifying statement as may be required pursuant to section 69e(c) of this title;(B) that the fur product contains or is composed of used fur, when such is the fact;(C) that the fur product contains or is composed of bleached, dyed, or otherwise artificially colored fur, when such is the fact;(D) that the fur product is composed in whole or in substantial part of paws, tails, bellies, or waste fur, when such is the fact;(E) the name, or other identification issued and registered by the Commission, of one or more of the persons who manufacture such fur product for introduction into commerce, introduce it into commerce, sell it in commerce, advertise or offer it for sale in commerce, or transport or distribute it in commerce;(F) the name of the country of origin of any imported furs used in the fur product;(3) if the label required by paragraph (2)(A) of this section sets forth the name or names of any animal or animals other than the name or names provided for in such paragraph.(Aug. 8, 1951, ch. 298, § 4, 65 Stat. 177.)Executive DocumentsTransfer of Functions

For transfer of functions of Federal Trade Commission, with certain exceptions, to Chairman of such Commission, see Reorg. Plan No. 8 of 1950, § 1, eff. May 24, 1950, 15 F.R. 3175, 64 Stat. 1264, set out under section 41 of this title.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 1961–2014 · leading case: Am. Meat Inst. v. United States Dep't of Agric., 760 F.3d 18 (D.C. Cir. 2014).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Am. Meat Inst. v. United States Dep't of Agric., 760 F.3d 18 (D.C. Cir. 2014). · cites it 2× “175 , 177-78 (1951) (current version at 15 U.S.C. § 69b(2)(F)); Textile Fiber Products Identification Act, Pub.”

Hoving Corp., a Corp. v. Fed. Trade Comm'n, 290 F.2d 803 (2d Cir. 1961). · cites it 2× “On appeal, the Commission adopted his findings and ordered petitioner to cease and desist from (1) misbranding furs as to all particulars enumerated in § 4(2) of the Act, 15 U.S.C.A. § 69b (2); 1 (2) falsely or de *805 eeptively invoicing fur products as to the information…”

— 15 U.S.C. § 69b(2)(F) — 1 case

Am. Meat Inst. v. United States Dep't of Agric., 760 F.3d 18 (D.C. Cir. 2014). “175 , 177-78 (1951) (current version at 15 U.S.C. § 69b(2)(F)); Textile Fiber Products Identification Act, Pub.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.