ALLcrimesfood&drugstaxestelecomcommercehealthconservationtransportationagricultureveteransbrowse all titles »
0

21 U.S.C. § 363 — Regulations making exemptions

submitted 88 years ago by ch. 675 to r/title-21-FOOD-AND-DRUGS · 68 words · no verdicts yet

in plain englishAI-generated · not legal advice

The Secretary must write rules exempting certain cosmetics from labeling requirements. This applies to cosmetics that, following normal trade practice, get processed, labeled, or repacked in bulk somewhere other than where they were first made. The cosmetics must not be adulterated or misbranded when they leave that first facility.

The Secretary must issue regulations that exempt certain cosmetics from this chapter's labeling requirements. This exemption applies to cosmetics that, following standard industry practice, are meant to be processed, labeled, or repacked in large quantities at a different location than where they were originally made or packaged.

The exemption comes with one condition: the cosmetics must not be adulterated or misbranded, as this chapter defines those terms, at the moment they leave the original processing, labeling, or repacking establishment.

the actual law source: uscode.house.gov ↗public domain

The Secretary shall promulgate regulations exempting from any labeling requirement of this chapter cosmetics which are, in accordance with the practice of the trade, to be processed, labeled, or repacked in substantial quantities at establishments other than those where originally processed or packed, on condition that such cosmetics are not adulterated or misbranded under the provisions of this chapter upon removal from such processing, labeling, or repacking establishment.

Source credit: (June 25, 1938, ch. 675, § 603, 52 Stat. 1054.)

history & why it existsrecord from the source credit
  • 1938Enacted · Act of June 25, 1938, ch. 675 · 52 Stat. 1054

A history note hasn’t been published yet. The record shows enactment by ch. 675 on 1938-06-25.

all 0 arguments · sorted by: best

0/280

no arguments yet — make the first case