4015. Misbranding of Desert-Air Lamp. U. S. v. 74 Devices, etc. (F. D. C. No. 30924. Sample No. 10132-L.) LIBEL FILED : April 16, 1951, Eastern District of Michigan; amended libel filed April 19, 1951. ALLEGED SHIPMENT : On or about September 26, 1950, and February 27, 1951, by the Dal Corp., from Hollywood, Calif. with a number of placards entitled "Bring the Desert Into Your Home Desert- Air Lamps" and a number of folders entitled "America's Wonderlamp the amazing . . . dark-burning Desert-Air Lamp." Attached to each lamp was a tag entitled "Here's To Your Health Bring the Desert Into Your Home." Examination showed that the lamp consisted of a parabolic reflector, with a central cone electric heating unit located in the center of the reflector. NATURE OF CHARGE: Misbranding, Section 502 (a), the labeling of the article, namely, the above-mentioned placards, folders, and tags accompanying the article, was false and misleading. The labeling represented and suggested that the article was effective to relieve bronchitis, head colds, hay fever, asthma, and all types of respiratory ailments, and that" it was effective to make babies breathe more easily and sleep better, to relieve the stuffy feeling in the baby's nose, to relieve night coughing, and to improve the user's health. The article would not fulfill the promises of benefit stated and implied. DISPOSITION : Lloyd H. Blrod, Detroit, Mich., the consignee and owner of the devices, and the Dal Corp., the shipper of the devices, filed answers denying that the labeling contained false and misleading statements. The Govern- ment subsequently served upon these parties a set of written interrogatories which were answered by the Dal Corp. Thereafter, Lloyd H. Elrod indicated that he was willing to enter into a consent decree of condemnation, but the Dal Corp. refused to admit the allegations of misbranding. The case came on for trial before the court without a jury on May 12, 1953, and at its conclusion, the court ruled in favor of the Government. On June 9, 1953, the court entered its findings of fact and conclusions of law that the device was misbranded by reason of false and misleading statements in the labeling with respect to the efficacy of the devices. In accordance with the findings and conclusions, the court entered a decree of condemnation on June 9, 1953, and ordered that the Government recover court costs, storage costs, and other proper expenses from the Dal Corp., and that the condemned devices be released under bond to Lloyd H. Elrod to be relabeled under the supervision of the Department of Health, Education, and elfare.