3826. Misbranding of sulfadiazine tablets, dextro-amphetamine sulfate tablets,
and Seconal Sodium capsules. U. S. v. Toland Dwight Mitchell. Plea of
nolo contendere. Fine, $300. (F. D. C. No. 30030. Sample Nos. 70852-K
to 70854-K, incl., 70856-K, 70857-K, 70860-K, 70861-K, 70863-K, 70864-K,
70866-K, 70867-K, 70869-K, 70872-K.)
INFORMATION FILED : February 15,1951, Western District of Oklahoma, against
Toland Dwight Mitchell.
ALLEGED VIOLATION : On or about April 23, 24, 25, 26, 28, and 30, 1950, while v
quantities of sulfadiazine tablets, dextro-amphetamine sulfate tablets, and
Seconal Sodium capsules were being held for sale after shipment in interstate
commerce, at the stores of Stanro Stores, Inc., operated under the names of
Reno Drug Co. and Standard Drug Co., at Oklahoma City, Okla., Toland
Dwight Mitchell, president of Stanro Stores, Inc., caused quantities of such
drugs to be repacked and disposed of without physicians' prescriptions, which
acts resulted in the repackaged drugs being misbranded.
NATURE OF CHARGE: Misbranding, Section 502 (b) (1), the repackaged sulfa-
diazine tablets and dextro-amphetamine sulfate tablets failed to bear labels
containing the name and place of business of the manufacturer, packer, or
distributor; and, Section 502 (b) (2), all of the repackaged drugs failed to
bear labels containing a statement of the quantity of the contents.
Further misbranding, Section 502 (d), the repackaged Seconal Sodium
capsules contained a chemical derivative of barbituric acid, which derivative
has been found to be, and by regulations designated as, habit forming; and the
label of the drug failed to bear the name, and quantity or proportion of such
derivative and in juxtaposition therewith the statement "Warning-May be
habit forming."
Further misbranding, Section 502 (e) (1), a portion of the repackaged sul-
fadiazine tablets failed to bear a label containing the common or usual name
of the drug; Section 502 (f)  (1), the labeling of all of the repackaged drugs
packaged sulfadiazine tablets and dextroamphetamine sulfate toilets failed
to bear labeling containing adequate warnings against use in those pathological
conditions whej* their use may be dangerous to health, and against unsafe
dosage and methods and duration of administration.
DISPOSITION :Jon March 23, 1951, a motion to quash the information was filed
on behalf it the defendant on the grounds that the information was duplicitous,
and, in WQdition, a motion was filed by the defendant for a bill of particulars.
On Sejicember 27, 1951, the court overruled the motions of the defendant.   On
/ JanuJfry 23, 1952, the defendant entered a plea of nolo contendere, and the
coim imposed a fine of $300.
3821/ Misbranding of Seconal Sodium capsules. U. S. v. Earl O. Meyer Drugs;
and Earl O. Meyer. Pleas of guilty. Fine of $1,000 against each defend-
ant; individual defendant also placed on probation for 4 years.   (F. D. C.
No. 32711.    Sample No. 12943-L.)
INFORMATION FILED: April 17, 1952, District of Colorado, against the Earl O.
Meyer Drugs, a partnership, Denver, Colo., and Earl O. Meyer, a partner in the
partnership.
ALLEGED VIOLATION: On or about August 3, 1951, while a number of Seconal
Sodium capsules were being held for sale at the Earl O. Meyer Drugs after
shipment in interstate commerce, the defendants caused a quantity of the
capsules to be repacked and dispensed without a physician's prescription,
which acts resulted in the capsules being misbranded.
NATURE OF CHARGE: Misbranding, Sections 502 (b) (1) and (2), the repackaged
eapsules failed to bear a label containing the name and place of business of
the manufacturer, packer, or distributor, and an accurate statement of the
quantity of the contents.
Further misbranding, Section 502 (d), the repackaged capsules contained
a chemical derivative of barbituric acid, which derivative has been found to
be, and by regulations designated as, habit forming; and the label of the
capsules failed to bear the name, and quantity or proportion of such derivative
and in juxtaposition therewith the statement "Warning-May be habit
forming."
Further misbranding, Section 502 (f) (1), the repackaged capsules failed
to beaiyfabeling containing adequate directions for use.
D/SPOSJEEON :    October 8, 1952.   Pleas of guilty having been entered, the court,
impjfsed a fine of $1,000 against each of the defendants, and, in addition,
|rced the individual defendant on probation for a period of 4 years.
B. Misbranding of Seconal Sodium capsules. U. S. v. Azriel Stein. Plea of