4415. Adulteration and misbranding of liver injection.   U. S. v. Bio-Ramo Drug
Co., Inc., and Dr. Clifford W. Price.   Pleas of not guilty.   Tried to the
court.   Verdict of guilty against corporation; motion granted for dis-
missal of charge against individual.   Fine of $750, plus costs, against
corporation.   (F. D. C. No. 35557.   Sample No. 26462-L.)
INFORMATION FILED :   January 6, 1954, District of Maryland, against Bio-Ramo
Drug Co., Inc., Baltimore, Md., and Dr. Clifford W. Price, technical director
of the corporation.
ALLEGED SHIPMENT :    On or about February 26,1953, from the State of Maryland V
.into the State of New Jersey.
NATURE OF CHARGE:   Adulteration, Section 501 (b), the article purported to be.
and was represented as "Liver Injection Crude," a drug the name of which is   f
recognized in the United States Pharmacopeia, an official compendium, and its.. -
strength differed from the official standard since each cubic centimeter of the-
article had a vitamin Bu activity equivalent to less than 2 micrograms of
cyanocobalamin, the minimum permitted by the standard.
Misbranding, Section 502 (a), the label statements "Liver Injection, Crude, r
U. S. P. Each cc has a Vitamin B-12 activity equivalent to 2 micrograms of (
cyanocobalamin" were false and misleading. The statements represented
and suggested that the article conformed to the specifications of the United
States Pharmacopeia for "Liver Injection Crude," and that the vitamin Bu
activity of the article was equivalent to 2 micrograms of cyanocobalamin per
cubic centimeter. The article did not conform to the specifications of the
United States Pharmacopeia for "Liver Injection Crude," and the vitamin Bu
activity of the article was not equivalent to 2 micrograms of cyanocobalamin
per cubic centimeter.
DISPOSITION : May 4, 1954. The defendants having entered pleas of not guilty,
the case came on for trial before the court without a jury. At the conclusion
of the testimony, the court granted the defendants' motion for dismissal of the
charge against Dr. Price and returned a verdict of guilty against the corpora-
tion.   The corporation was fined $750, plus costs.