UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
In the Matter of
LONDON INTERNATIONAL GROUP, INC., a corporation.
DOCKET NO. C-3800
The Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that London International Group, Inc., a corporation, has violated the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act, and it appearing to the Commission that this proceeding is in the public interest, alleges:
1. Respondent London International Group, Inc. is a New Jersey corporation with its principal office or place of business at 3585 Engineering Drive, Norcross, Georgia 30092.
2. Respondent has manufactured, advertised, labeled, offered for sale, sold, and distributed products to the public, including "Ramses" brand condoms. Ramses brand condoms are "devices," within the meaning of Sections 12 and 15 of the Federal Trade Commission Act.
3. 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.
4. Respondent has disseminated or has caused to be disseminated advertisements for Ramses brand condoms, including but not necessarily limited to the attached Exhibits A through C. These advertisements contain the following statements and depictions:
5. Through the means described in Paragraph 4, respondent has represented, expressly or by implication, that:
6. Through the means described in Paragraph 4, respondent has represented, expressly or by implication, that it possessed and relied upon a reasonable basis that substantiated the representations set forth in Paragraph 5, at the time the representations were made.
7. In truth and in fact, respondent did not possess and rely upon a reasonable basis that substantiated the representations set forth in Paragraph 5, at the time the representations were made. Respondent submitted inadequate data to substantiate its claim that Ramses brand condoms are thirty percent stronger than other condoms. Respondent also submitted inadequate substantiation for the claim that Ramses brand condoms break thirty percent less often than other condoms. Therefore, the representation set forth in Paragraph 6 was, and is, false or misleading.
8. The acts and 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.
THEREFORE, the Federal Trade Commission this seventh day of April, 1998, has issued this complaint against respondent.
By the Commission.
Donald S. Clark