Alberty Food Products v. United States

The facts of this case have been stipulated. They appear in detail in the opinion of the District Court. D.C.S.D.Cal. 1951, 98 F.Supp. 23, 25 . For our purposes it is sufficient to state that appellants manufacture, pack and distribute certain drugs in interstate commerce. The District Court found the drugs ■ in question to be “misbranded” within the meaning of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act in that their labeling failed to bear “adequate directions for use”. 21 U.S.C.A; § 352(f)(1). An injunction was issued permanently restraining appellants from introducing into interstate commerce said drugs or any other drug “ * * * which is misbranded within the meaning of 21 U.S.C. § 352 (f) (1) by reason of the failure of its labeling (1) to enumerate the disease conditions for which said drug is intended and offered to the public, (2) to specify the structures or functions of the body which it is intended to affect and for which it is offered to the public, and (3) to state the dosage and frequency and duration of administration of such drug for the treatment or prevention of such conditions, or for affecting such structures or functions of the body.”

The principal contention…