 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
1
.
DECISION & ORDER
|
EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
COMMISSION COMPLAINT REPRESENTATION FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION TRADE COMMISSION ACT OFFICERS VIOLATION THEREAFTER AGREEMENT JURISDICTION SUCCESSORS SALE TERMINATE AFFECTING COMMERCE EVIDENCE APPEALING MANNER RELIABLE SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE PARAGRAPH RULING CHARGE CONSENT JURISDICTIONAL FACTS PURPOSES FORD MOTOR COMPANY AGENTS EMPLOYEES SUBSIDIARIES |
9523210
B202541
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
COMMISSIONERS: Robert Pitofsky, Chairman
Mary L. Azcuenaga
Janet D. Steiger
Roscoe B. Starek, III
Christine A. Varney
)
In the Matter of ) DOCKET NO. C-3679
)
FORD MOTOR COMPANY, )
a corporation. ) DECISION AND ORDER
)
)
)
The Federal Trade Commission having initiated an
investigation of certain acts and practices of the respondent
named in the caption hereof, and the respondent having been
furnished thereafter with a copy of a draft of complaint which
the San Francisco Regional Office proposed to present to the
Commission for its consideration and which, if issued by the
Commission, would charge respondent with violation of the Federal
Trade Commission Act; and
The respondent, its attorney, and counsel for the Commission
having thereafter executed an agreement containing a consent
order, an admission by the respondent of all the jurisdictional
facts set forth in the aforesaid draft of complaint, a statement
that the signing of said agreement is for settlement purposes
only and does not constitute an admission by respondent that the
law has been violated as alleged in such complaint, or that the
facts as alleged in such complaint, other than jurisdictional
facts, are true and waivers and other provisions as required by
the Commission's Rules; and
The Commission having thereafter considered the matter and
having determined that it had reason to believe that the
respondent has violated the said Act, and that a complaint should
issue stating its charges in that respect, and having thereupon
SNIPPETS:
|
|
2
.
COMPLAINT
|
EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
RESPONDENT MICRONAIR FILTRATION SYSTEM FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION REPRESENTATION ADVERTISEMENTS ACT AIR EXHIBITS POLLUTANTS AUTOMOBILES DUST REPRESENTATION SET REASON FORD MOTOR COMPANY ALLEGES ROAD DUST MERCURY MYSTIQUE FILTER PRACTICES COMPLAINT AFFECTING COMMERCE EXHIBITS A-C CAR VIOLATION BREATH ALLERGY IMPLICATION DRIVER TRUTH |
9523210
B202541
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
___________________________________)
In the Matter of ))
FORD MOTOR COMPANY, ) DOCKET NO. C-3679
a corporation. )))
___________________________________)
COMPLAINT
The Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that
Ford Motor Company ("respondent"), a corporation, has violated
the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act, and it
appearing to the Commission that a proceeding by it in respect
thereof would be in the public interest, alleges:
PARAGRAPH ONE: Respondent Ford Motor Company is a Delaware
corporation, with its offices and principal place of business
located at The American Road, Dearborn, Michigan 48121.
PARAGRAPH TWO: Respondent has manufactured, advertised,
offered for sale, sold, and distributed automobiles, automotive
parts, and other products to consumers. Certain models of Ford
automobiles, such as the Mercury Mystique and Lincoln
Continental, include an automotive cabin air filter called the
"MicronAir Filtration System."
PARAGRAPH THREE: The acts and practices of respondent
alleged in this complaint have been in or affecting commerce, as
"commerce" is defined in Section 4 of the Federal Trade
Commission Act.
PARAGRAPH FOUR: Respondent has disseminated or has caused
to be disseminated advertisements for the MicronAir Filtration
System, including but not necessarily limited to the attached
Exhibits A-C. These advertisements contain the following
statements:
2
A. "Eat No One's Dust.
SNIPPETS:
|
|
|
| | | |
|
|
