29348. Frozen lobster tails.    (F.D.C. No. 45186.   S. Nos. 46-514 R, 46-531 R.) 
QUANTITY:   863   30-lb. ctns., and 889 ctns., each containing 6 1%-lb. pkgs., at
Cleveland, Ohio. 
SHIPPED :   Between 2-16-60 and 4-12-60, from New York, N.Y. 
LIBELED :   12-16-60, N. Dist. Ohio. 
CHARGE:   402(a)(3)—contained decomposed lobster tails while held for sale.
filed which permitted the Wouka Distributing Co., Inc., of New York, N.Y., 
Produce Service, Inc., of Cleveland, Ohio, and the United States Food and 
Drug Administration to inspect and sample the article. On 3-30-61, pursuant 
to stipulation, the time for Wouka Distributing Co., Inc., and Produce Service, 
Inc., to appear, make claim or answer was extended to 5-31-61.
On 4-19-61, Produce Service, Inc., and Skyline Service, Inc., of Cleveland, 
Ohio, filed a joint claim to the article and admitted that the goods were 
"decomposed in part." On 5-8-61, on motion of Produce Service, Inc., and 
Skyline Service, Inc., as claimants, an order was entered pursuant to which 
Produce Service, Inc., and the United States Food and Drug Administration 
were permitted to inspect and to segregate and/or sort approximately 1,000 
pounds of the article, and the Food and Drug Administration was to supervise 
the segregation and/or sorting done by Produce Service, Inc., and take such 
necessary samples of the segregated portions of the article as to determine 
the effectiveness of the claimants' method and processes of segregation and 
sorting.
On 5-9-61, the Food and Drug Administration supervised a pilot segregation 
operation on approximately 1,000 pounds of the article. There were separated 
out as "reject" approximately 168 pounds of that lot. A representative sample 
consisting of 200 lobster tails was collected and examined and the segregation 
procedure was determined to be generally satisfactory.
On 5-26-61, Produce Service, Inc., and Skyline Service, Inc., filed a motion 
requesting summary judgment, or, in the alternative, an order setting the 
case for trial in June 1961.
On 5-31-61, Wouka Distributing Co., Inc., filed an answer to the libel in 
which the firm denied that the article was adulterated, stated that Wouka 
Distributing Co., Inc., had delivered the article to Produce Service, Inc., on 
or about 2-16-60 and 4-12-60, stated that since that time Wouka Distributing 
Co., Inc., had neither possession nor control of the article, stated that Wouka 
Distributing Co., Inc., was not a party in interest and requested that it be 
stricken as a party in interest or that, if the court did not grant such relief, 
it be permitted to defend the action without making claim to the article. On 
6-3-61, Wouka Distributing Co., filed a motion for an order striking Wouka 
Distributing Co., Inc., as a party in interest mime pro tune on the ground 
that it did not have title, possession, or control of the article; the motion 
requested that Wouka's motion be determined before the motion for summary 
judgment and further requested that the motion for summary judgment be 
held in abeyance. On 6-6-61, the Government filed a motion to strike Wouka's 
pleading of 5-31-61.
On 6-14-61, Produce Service, Inc., amended its claim to the article and 
stated that Skyline Service, Inc., was the wholly owned subsidiary of Produce 
Service, Inc., that Wouka Distributing Co., Inc., was the true and lawful 
owner of the article, that Produce Service, Inc., claimed the article as bailee 
for Wouka, that the article was in part adulterated, and that the claimant 
was prepared to abide by and carry out any order of the court pertaining to 
condemnation, release and/or disposition of the article. On 6-19-61, the Gov- 
ernment filed a motion requesting that the Government's previous motion to 
strike be amended to request that all pleading filed by Wouka subsequent to 
its answer also be stricken.
On 8-8-61, the court granted the Government's motion to strike the plead- 
ings of Wouka Distributing Co., Inc.   On 8-31-61, upon the motion for sum-
mary judgment of Produce Service, Inc., the court condemned the article as 
adulterated while held for sale after shipment in interstate commerce, and 
ordered the destruction of the article, excepting, however, any of the article re- 
leased under bond to be brought into compliance with the law by the claimant. 
On 9-12-61, an order was filed authorizing the segregation and sorting of the 
article. On 12-22-61, the segregation operations were completed resulting in 
the destruction of approximately 5,700 pounds of the article.
FRUITS AND VEGETABLES
CANNED FRUIT