.4691. Misbranding1 of chocolate peanut butter. IT. S. v. 43 Cases of Chocolate 
Peanut Butter. Default decree of condemnation. Product ordered de- 
stroyed or delivered to a charitable institution. (F. I). C. No. 8658. Sam- 
ple No. 14413-F.)
This product was not a mixture composed of chocolate and peanut butter as 
indicated by its labeling, but was composed essentially of peanut butter with 
substantial amounts of sugar, water, and corn sirup, flavored with cocoa.
On November 5, 1942, the United States attorney for the District of Oregon 
filed a libel against 43 cases, each containing 1 dozen jars, of chocolate peanut 
butter at Portland, Oreg., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate 
commerce on or about August 5, 1942, by Elizabeth Mote from Los Angeles, Calif.
The article was alleged to be misbranded: (1) In that the statements in the 
labeling "Choc-O-P'Nut Outer Chocolate Flavored Peanut Butter Spread," were 
false and misleading since they represented and suggested that the article was 
a mixture of peanut butter and chocolate, whereas, it was not a mixture of 
peanut butter and chocolate. (2) In that the following statements: "Vitamin 
Enriched * * * each pound contains not less than Vitamin Bi (Thiamin) 
1250 Intl. Units, Vitamin G (B2 or Riboflavin) 1000 Micrograms, Nicotinic Acid 
(a B complex vitamin) 20000 Micrograms, Pantothenic Acid (a B complex 
vitamin) 2500 Micrograms," were misleading since the statement "Vitamin En- 
riched" and the declaration of vitamin content in terms of International units 
and weight (micrograms) suggested that the article had been fortified with 
substantial quantities of the vitamins listed, whereas it had not been fortified 
with substantial amounts of the named vitamins except vitamin Bi. (3) In 
that it was fabricated from two or more ingredients and its label failed to bear 
the common or usual name of each such ingredient. (4) In that it purported 
to be and was represented as a food for special dietary uses and its label failed 
to bear such information concerning its vitamin properties as had been deter- 
mined to be, and by regulations prescribed as, necessary in order to inform 
purchasers fully as to its value for such uses since its label failed to state the 
proportion of the minimum daily requirement of vitamin B* and riboflavin con- 
tained in a specifled quantity of the article, and failed to state that the need for 
pantothenic acid in human nutrition has not been established.
On December 9, 1942, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemna- 
tion was entered and the product was ordered destroyed or delivered to a 
charitable institution. 
.