3803. Misbranding of vegetable oil.    U. S. v. 21 Cases of Oil.    Consent decree of
condemnation.    Product ordered released under bond for relabeling:.    (F.
D. C. No. 7459.   Sample Nos. 86645-E, 86685-E.)
This product was not labeled to show the common or usual name of the in- 
gredients; the name and address of the packer were inconspicuously placed on 
the label; it was short of the declared volume and undue prominence was given 
in the labeling to the statement "Italian Olive Oil."
On May 5, ly^2, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of Wis- 
I consign filed a libel against 21 cases of vegetable oil at Milwaukee, Wis., alleging 
that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about January 
26, 1942, by the V. Formusa Co. from Chicago, Ill.; and charging that it was 
misbranded. It was labeled in part: "Contents One Gallon Marconi Brand 
Superb Oil Contains 20% Italian Olive Oil and 80% Vegetable and Peanut 
Oils."
It was alleged to be misbranded (1) in that the design of medals, the undue 
prominence of the statement "Italian Olive Oil" and the statement "Marconi 
Oil 100%" were false and misleading since they created the impression that it 
was a foreign product; (2) in that the statement on the label, "Inspection 
Guaranteed," was misleading since it implied that the article had been inspected 
by an agency of the Government, which was not the case; (3) in that the state- 
ment "Contents One Gallon" was false and misleading as applied to an article 
that was short of the declared volume; (4) in that it was in package form and 
its label failed to bear an accurate statement of the quantity of the contents; 
(5) in that the name and place of business of the packer, required by law to 
appear on the label, was not prominently placed thereon with such conspicuous- 
ness (as compared with other words, statements, designs, or devices in the 
labeling) as to render it likely to be read by the ordinary individual' under Cus- 
tomary conditions of purchase and use; and (6) in that it was fabricated from 
two or more ingredients and its label failed to bear the common or usual name 
of each ingredient.
. On May 25, 1942, Vincent Formosa and Peter Formusa, trading as the V. 
Formusa Co., claimants, having admitted the allegations of the libel, judgment 
of condemnation was entered and the product was ordered released under bond 
conditioned that it be relabeled under the supervision of the Food and Drug 
Administration.