NATIONAL DAIRY PRODUCTS CORP. Syllabus It is ordered That the initial decision be modified by striking the last sentence of the fourth fuD paragraph on pag'e 61 and the fifth fuD paragraph on page 61. It is further ordered That the initial decision be modified by striking the order on page 61 and substituting therefor the fol1owing: It is ordered That respondent Montgomery Ward & Co. Incorporated, a corporation , and its offcers, representatives agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device , in connection with the offering for sale, sale, or distribution of any articles of merchandise in commerce, as commerce" is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act do forthwith cease and desist from: Representing, directly or by implication that any of res- pondent's merchandise is guaranteed unless the nature and extent of the guarantee, the identity of the guaran- tor, and the manner in which the guarantor wil perform thereunder are clearly and conspicuously disclosed. It is furtiJer ordered That the hearing examiner s initial deci- sion , as modified by this order and the accompanying opinion be and it hereby is, adopted as the decision of the Commission. It is further ordered That the respondent shaD within sixty (60) days after service upon it of this order, file with the Com- mission a report, in writing, setting forth in detail the manner and form in which they have complied with the order to cease and desist set forth herein. Commissioners Elman and ReiDy dissented and have filed dis- senting opinions. IN THE MATTER OF KATIONAL DAIRY PRODUCTS CORPORATION ORDER , OPINIONS , ETC. , IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF SECS. 2(a) and 2(d) OF THE CLAYTON ACT Docket 7018. Cmnplrn , Dec. 1957-Dedsion , July , 1966 Order requiring a company engaged in processing and distributing dairy and food products with h(- adquartcl's in New York City, to cease discriminat- ing in prices and promotional allowances between competing retailers handling the product line of its Scaltest Foods Division , in violation of Sees. 2(a) and 2(d) of the Clayton Act. FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION DECISIONS Complaint 70 F. COMPLAINT The Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that National Dairy Products Corporation has violated and is now vio- lating the provisions of subsections (a) and (d) of Section 2 of the Clayton Act (U. S. Title 15 , Section 13), hereby issues its complaint charging as fo11ows com,T I Charging violation of subsection (a) of Section 2 of the Clay- ton Act, the Commission a11eges: PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent named herein is National Dairy Products Corporation. Respondent is a corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the Jaws of the State of Delaware. Respondent' s principal offce and place of business is located at 260 Madison Avenue ew York City, New York. PAR. 2. Respondent is extensively engaged in the business of purchasing, manufacturing, processing, distributing, and se1Hng dairy and alled products in various States of the United States and in the District of Columbia. Since respondent's incorporation on December 8 , 1923, it has acquired the entire stock or control of assets of numerous con- cerns. Respondent, formerly a holding company, in 1956 carried forward a program of integration and corporate simplification taking over properties and assets of more than forty principal domestic subsidiaries and continuing their operations as divisions. Respondent has also caused a number of its subsidiaries to be merged with one another. As of December 31 , 1956 , respondent held 10070 of the voting stock in its remaining subsidiaries, being about forty in number. Respondent's program of integrating its subsidiaries is now who11y or substantia11y completed. Respondent conducts its business through its divisions and sub- sidiaries. Through its Sealtest division, respondent se11s milk, vi- tamin D milk, homogenized mi1k, concentrated fresh milk , choco- late milk, buttermilk, cream, butter, eggs , cottage cheese , special milks, and other dairy products to homes , restaurants , stores hospitals, hotels, and institutions in States in the Eastern, Mid- western, and Southern parts of the Vnited States, including the District of Columbia. Respondent has numerous ice cream brands sold sectionally in various parts of about 33 States and in the Dis- trict of Columbia , primarily in the Eastern part of the United States. NATIONAL DAIRY PRODUCTS CORP. Complaint Respondent is the larg-est distributor and se1ler of dairy prod- ucts in the United States. Respondent' s net sales for 1956 were 352 878 027. 00. PAR. 3. Respondent se1ls dairy products of like g-rade and qual- ity to a large number of purchasers located in many States of the United States, particularly in those of the East, South, and Mid- west, and in the District of Columbia for use , consumption, or re- sale therein. Respondent maintains and operates a large number of receiving stations, manufacturing, and processing plants and distribution depots located in or near the cities, towns, and places where it sells its said products. The bulk of respondent' s said products are delivered to its customers in its own trucks. PAR 4. In the course and conduct of its business respondent is now and for many years past has been shipping dairy products from the State or States where such products are manufactured processed, or stored in anticipation of sale and shipment, to pur- chasers located in other States of the United States and in other places under the jurisdiction of the United States , including the District of Columbia in a constant current of commerce as " com- merce" is defined in the Clayton Act. Respondent also se1ls its said products in commerce as "commerce" is defined in the Clay- ton Act to purchasers located in the same states where such prod- ucts are manufactured , processed , or stored in anticipation of sale. Included among respondent' s plants and facilities for the manu- facture, processing, and sale of dairy products, respondent owns and operates a manufacturing- and processing plant located in the city of Toledo , Ohio , wherc it manufactures and processes sub- stantial quantities of its diary products which respondent se1ls in Ohio and Michigan. Other substantial quantities of said products are manufactured and processed in other States by other divi- sions , plants , or subsidiaries of respondent , which respondent ships or causes to be shipped to respondent' s Toledo, Ohio, plant for subsequent distribution and sale. Some of such products are shipped in packages ready for sale and others are shipped in bulk and are further processed in respondent' s Toledo plant for subse- quent sale. Raw milk is purchased by respondent from farmers and dairymen located both in Ohio and in other States, including Michigan , which is shipped and transported to respondent's To- ledo, Ohio , plant where it is processed and subsequently sold to purchasers located in Ohio and Michigan. Respondent owns or op- - - FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION DECISIONS Complaint 70 F. erates a depot and sales offce in Monroe, Michigan, to which its said products are transported or caused to be transported by res- pondent from its Toledo , Ohio, plant for subsequent sale in Michi- gan. Respondent transports, or causes to be transported, substan- tial quantities of its said products in respondent' s own trucks from respondent' s Toledo, Ohio, plant into Michigan which re- spondent seIJs and delivers to customers located in Michigan. In other instances respondent seDs its said dairy products to distrib- utors who transport said products from Toledo, Ohio, to various cities, towns, and places in Michigan, principal1y nearby to Mon- roe, Michigan , who sel1 the same to customers in those areas. Res- pondent has been and is engaged in a constant and uninterrupted trade in its said products in interstate commerce in sales of its dairy products in the States of Ohio and Michigan, as herein al- leged. PAR. 5. The bulk of respondent' s wholesale business is done with retailers such as stores, restaurants, hote1s, and other busi- nesses and establishments which reseIJ to consumers. Respondent, in thc sale of its said products to retailers and con- sumers , is in substantial competition with other manufacturers processors , distributors , and sel1ers of dairy products. Many of respondent's retailer- customers as herein described are in sub- stantial competition with one another in the resale of respon- dent' s said products to consumers. PAR. 6. In the course and conduct of its business in commerce respondent has discriminated in price in the sale of dairy prod- ucts by scIJing such pl"ducts of like grade and quality at different prices to diffcrent and competing purchasers. Included among such sales at discriminatory prices were sales of milk and other dairy products by respondent, particularly those made by and through its Sealtest division , in the cities of Toledo, Ohio, and Monroe, :YIichigan , and in nearby cities, towns and places in Ohio and Michigan. One of the methods and plans used by respondent to effect and carry out such discrimination in price is a quantity discount or re- bate scbedule or system applicable to its retailer-customers lo- cated or doing business in the areas of Ohio and Michigan here- inbefore described , which respondent formulated and put into ef- fect on or about Novcmber 1 , 1954, and which with certain changes therein, is stil in force and effect. Respondent' s quantity discount and rebate plan is applied to the monthly purchases by its retailer-customers