14897. Alleged adulteration and misbranding of Vita-Slim.   U. S. v. Orville Z.
Dunlap (Industrial Vitamin Co. and Vitamin Industries).   Bail bond 
forfeited and case dismissed.   (F. D. C No. 16558.   Sample Nos. 7071-F, 
66961-F, 85664-F.) 
INFORMATION FILED:   January 16, 1946, District of Nebraska, against Orville
Z. Dunlap, trading as the Industrial Vitamin Co. and the Vitamin Industries,
at Omaha, Nebr.
ALLEGED SHIPMENT: On or about February 13, July 26, and August 11, 1944, 
from the State of Nebraska into the States of Missouri, Kansas, and Colorado.
NATURE OF CHARGE: Adulteration, Section 402 (b) (1), valuable constituents 
of the article, vitamin Bi, vitamin C, vitamin D, niacin, calcium, phosphorus, 
iron, and iodine, had been in whole or in part omitted and abstracted from 
the article.
Misbranding, Section 403 (a), the labeling contained false and misleading 
statements with respect to the amount of vitamins and minerals supplied by 
the article, the nutritional significance of the article, and the efficacy of the 
article for the reduction of weight. Further misbranding, Section 403 (j), the 
article purported to be and was represented for special dietary uses by man 
by reason of its vitamin properties with respect to vitamins A, Bi, B2, B6, C, D, 
and E, and calcium pantothenate, and by reason of its mineral properties with 
respect to calcium, phosphorus, iron, and iodine; and its label did not bear such 
information concerning its vitamin and mineral properties as had been deter- 
mined to be, and by regulations prescribed as, necessary in order fully to 
inform purchasers as to its value for such uses.
DISPOSITION: On January 17, 1946, the defendant was arrested, and at that 
time he furnished bail in the sum of $500. When the case was subsequently 
called for arraignment, it was discovered that the defendant had abandoned 
all of his business properties and left for parts unknown. A warrant was 
therefore issued for the defendant's apprehension as a fugitive. On January 
15, 1947, an order was entered forfeiting the bail bond. The defendant was 
not thereafter apprehended, and on June 27, 1949, the case was dismissed.