2003. Misbranding: of sulfathiazole tablets,  sulfadiazine tablets, and nembutal
capsules. U. S. v. I. James Hendelberg (Southeast Pharmacy). Plea
of nolo contendere. Fine, $400. (F. D. C. No. 19538. Sample Nos.'2966-H
to 2968-H, incl., 2971-H.)
INFORMATION FILED: April 19, 1946, District of Columbia, against I. James
Hendelberg, trading as Southeast Pharmacy, Washington, D. C.
PRODUCT : Sulfathiazole tablets and sulfadiazine tablets, sulfa drugs; and nem-
butal capsules which contained pentobarbital, a derivative of barbituric acid,
which has been designated as habit forming.
NATURE OF CHARGE : That between the approximate dates of December 27, 1945,
and January 17, 1946, while the articles were in interstate commerce, the
defendant repacked a quantity of the various articles in unlabeled envelopes
and boxes.
The information further charged that the acts of the defendant resulted
in the misbranding of the articles in the following respects: Section 502 (b) (1)
and (2), the articles failed to bear labels containing the name and place of
business of the manufacturer, packer, or distributor, and an accurate statement
of the quantity of the contents; Section 502 (e), they were not designated
solely by names recognized in an official compendium, and they failed to bear
labels declaring the common or usual names of the articles; Section 502 (f) (1),
they were without labels bearing adequate directions for use; and, Section
502 (f) (2), they were without labels bearing such adequate warnings against
use in those pathological conditions or by children where their use may be
dangerous to health, or against unsafe dosage or methods or duration of ad-
ministration or applications, in such manner and form as are necessary
for the protection of users.
Further misbranding, nembutal (pentobarbital sodium), Section 502 (e),
} the article failed to bear a label containing the name and quantity or proportion
of such substance or derivative and, in juxtaposition therewith, a statement
"Warning??may be habit forming.
DISPOSITION: April 22, 1946. The defendant having entered a plea of nolo
contendere, the court imposed the fine of $100 on each count, a total, fine of
$400.
.