9123336 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA In the Matter of CONOPCO, INC. doing business as DOCKET NO. C-3706 COMPLAINT The Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that Conopco, Inc. doing business as Van Den Bergh Foods Company ("respondent"), has violated 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 is a New York corporation with its office and principal place of business located at 390 Park Avenue, New York, New York 10022. Van Den Bergh Foods Company is an unincorporated operating division of Conopco, Inc. Conopco, Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Unilever United States, Inc., a Delaware corporation with its office and principal place of business also located at 390 Park Avenue, New York, New York 10022. PARAGRAPH TWO: Respondent, through its operating division known as Van Den Bergh Foods Company, has manufactured, advertised, labeled, offered for sale, sold and distributed margarines and spreads, including Promise spread, Promise Extra Light margarine and Promise Ultra (26%) spread (hereinafter sometimes collectively referred to as "Promise margarines and spreads") and other foods to consumers. Promise spread, Promise Extra Light margarine and Promise Ultra (26%) spread are "foods" within the meaning of Sections 12 and 15 of the Federal Trade Commission Act. 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 Promise margarines and spreads, including but not necessarily limited to the advertisements attached as Exhibits A through E. These advertisements contain the following statements and depictions:
PARAGRAPH FIVE: Through the use of the statements and depictions contained in the advertisements referred to in PARAGRAPH FOUR, including but not necessarily limited to the advertisements attached as Exhibits A through E, respondent has represented, directly or by implication, that eating Promise spread, Promise Extra Light margarine or Promise Ultra (26%) spread helps reduce the risk of heart disease. PARAGRAPH SIX: Through the use of the statements and depictions set forth in the advertisements referred to in PARAGRAPH FOUR, including but not necessarily limited to the advertisements attached as Exhibits A through E, respondent has represented, directly or by implication, that at the time it made the representation set forth in PARAGRAPH FIVE, respondent possessed and relied upon a reasonable basis that substantiated such representation. PARAGRAPH SEVEN: In truth and in fact, at the time it made the representation set forth in PARAGRAPH FIVE, respondent did not possess and rely upon a reasonable basis that substantiated such representation. Therefore, the representation set forth in PARAGRAPH SIX was, and is, false and misleading. PARAGRAPH EIGHT: Through the use of the statements and depictions contained in the advertisements referred to in PARAGRAPH FOUR, including but not necessarily limited to the advertisements attached as Exhibits A and D, respondent has represented, directly or by implication, that Promise spread and Promise Extra Light margarine [Exhibit A] and Promise Ultra (26%) spread [Exhibit D] are low in total fat. PARAGRAPH NINE: In truth and in fact, Promise spread, Promise Extra Light margarine and Promise Ultra (26%) spread are not low in total fat. At the time respondent made the representation, Promise spread contained 9.5 grams of fat per 14 gram serving and 34 grams of fat per 50 grams; Promise Extra Light margarine contained 5.6 grams of fat per 14 gram serving and 20 grams of fat per 50 grams; and Promise Ultra (26%) spread contained 3.64 grams of fat per 14 gram serving and 13 grams of fat per 50 grams. Therefore, the representation set forth in PARAGRAPH EIGHT was and is false and misleading. PARAGRAPH TEN: Through the use of the statements and depictions contained in the advertisements referred to in PARAGRAPH FOUR, including but not necessarily limited to the advertisements attached as Exhibits A and B, respondent has represented, directly or by implication, that Promise spread is low in saturated fat. PARAGRAPH ELEVEN: In truth and in fact, Promise spread is not low in saturated fat. At the time respondent made the representation, Promise spread contained 1.6 grams of saturated fat per 14 gram serving with 17 percent of calories derived from saturated fat. Therefore, the representation set forth in PARAGRAPH TEN was and is false and misleading. PARAGRAPH TWELVE: Through the use of the statements and depictions contained in the advertisements referred to in PARAGRAPH FOUR, including but not limited to the advertisement attached as Exhibit A, respondent has represented, directly or by implication, that Promise spread and Promise Extra Light margarine have no dietary cholesterol. Respondent has failed to adequately disclose that Promise spread and Promise Extra Light margarine contain a significant amount of total fat. In light of respondent's representation that Promise spread and Promise Extra Light margarine have no dietary cholesterol, the significant total fat content of the products would be material to consumers and the failure to adequately disclose this fact is deceptive. PARAGRAPH THIRTEEN: The acts or practices of respondent, as alleged in this complaint, constitute unfair or deceptive acts or practices and the making of false advertisements in or affecting commerce in violation of Sections 5(a) and 12 of the Federal Trade Commission Act. For these reasons, the Federal Trade Commission, on this twenty-third day of January, 1997, has issued this complaint against respondent. By the Commission. Donald S. Clark SEAL: [Exhibits A-E attached to paper copies of complaint, but not available in electronic format.] |