1134. Misbranding: of Nulfey Tablets and Genuine O. B. C. Capsules.    U. S. v. 54
Packages of Nulfey Tablets and 54 Packages of Genuine O. B. C. Capsules
(and 1 other seizure action against Nulfey Tablets). Default decrees of
condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. Nos. 10328, 11446. Sample Nos.
22654-F, 22655-F, 22867-F.)
On July 27 and December 16, 1943, the United States attorneys for the District
of New Jersey and the District of Delaware filed libels against 54 packages of
Nulfey Tablets and 54 packages of Genuine O. B. C. Capsules at Atlantic City,
N. J., and 61 packages of Nulfey Tablets at Wilmington, Del., alleging that the
articles, which had been consigned by the William A. Reed Co. on or about April
26, May 20, and June 10, 1943, had been shipped from Philadelphia, Pa.; and
charging that they were misbranded.
Examination of the Nulfey Tablets disclosed that the article consisted essen-
tially of sodium salicylate, sodium biphosphate, methenamine, and plant drugs
including a laxative drug.
It was alleged to be misbranded because of false and misleading statements in
its labeling which represented and suggested that the article would be effective
for the relief of rheumatism, arthritis, neuritis, and sciatica; and that an article -
that was a diuretic and analgesic would be effective for the relief of kidney
dysfunction.
Examination of the Genuine O. B. C. Capsules disclosed that the article con-
sisted essentially of phenolphthalein, caffeine, and clay; that the statement of
ingredients appeared in small type on the bottom of the box containing the
article; and that the warnings required by law to appear in the labeling did not
appear on the box but were inconspicuously placed in the circular entitled "How
To Eat and Get Thin the O. B. C. Way."
It was alleged to be misbranded in that certain statements in its labeling were
false and misleading since they represented and suggested that the article would
be effective in the reduction of weight, whereas it was merely a phenolphthalein
laxative and would not be so effective; and in that the statement of active
ingredients and warnings against use and unsafe dosage or methods or duration
of administration were not prominently placed upon the labeling with such
conspicuousness, as compared with other words, statements, designs, or devices
in the labeling, as to render them likely to be read and understood by the ordinary
individual under customary conditions of purchase and use.
On November 27, 1943, and January 26, 1944, no claimant having appeared,
judgments of condemnation were entered and the products were ordered destroyed.