In the Matter of the Complaint Against

 WORLD WIDE PUBLISHING CO.
 CONRAD PUBLISHING CO.
 Post Office Box 94 at
 Dundee, Illinois 60118

 and

 WORLD WIDE PUBLISHING INC.
 1133 Tower Road at
 Schaumburg, Illinois 60195

 P.S. Docket No. 6/181;  
 
 11/29/79
 
 Cohen, James A.  

Complainant has filed a "Petition for Mail-Stop Order Based Upon Breach of Consent Agreement" alleging that World Wide Publishing Inc. at 1133 Tower Road, Schaumburg, Illinois 60195 (hereafter referred to as Respondent) is engaged in the conduct of an enterprise through the United States mails in violation of the terms of a consent agreement dated January 15, 1979. By the terms of the consent agreement Respondent agreed to discontinue promotional activities offering part-time employment clipping newspaper items. In the event of a breach of the consent agreement, paragraph 3 of the agreement provides for the issuance of a temporary detention order pending resolution of the issues raised by the alleged breach, and a mail-stop order pursuant to 39 U.S.C. § 3005 if a breach is found. A temporary detention order as provided in paragraph 3 was issued on August 24, 1979.

Respondent has filed a reply to the petition for breach in which it does not take issue with any of the facts alleged therein. It does, however, seek clarification as to which portion of its promotional activities the petition addresses, guidance as to whether other promotions it is engaged in are covered by this proceeding, and advice as to whether orders in-house may be filled even though it cannot fill additional orders.

The promotional activities which Complainant alleges are in breach of the consent agreement are attached to Complainant's petition as Exhibits 1, 2 and 6. Complainant alleges, and it is not disputed, that Exhibits 1 and 2 falsely represent what is contained in Exhibit 6. Although Exhibits 1 and 2 are, therefore, the primary basis for the petition since they contain the false representations, the three exhibits together constitute the entire scheme which violates the terms of the consent agreement of January 15, 1979.

Respondent has attached to its reply various promotional items and books for which it asks approval to solicit remittances through the mail under a different corporate name. These materials are not the subject of Complainant's petition and, therefore, their use will not be affected by a mail-stop order issued in this proceeding. However, this is not to be construed as approval or disapproval of such promotional materials. The purpose of this proceeding is to adjudicate issues only where an actual violation of statute or consent agreement is alleged. No such allegation has been made with respect to the items attached to Respondent's reply and no findings or conclusions are made with respect to those materials.

Finally, Respondent asks whether it can fill orders already received. Such orders were received in response to promotional activities which violate the terms of Respondent's consent agreement. Under paragraph 2 of that agreement all orders are to be returned to senders unfilled.

The uncontroverted allegations in the petition as well as a review of the entire record establish that Respondent has resumed making the representations it agreed to discontinue for a product which is substantially identical to the product that was the subject of the consent agreement. Accordingly, Respondent has breached the terms of the consent agreement.

A remedial order pursuant to the terms of that agreement is being issued contemporaneously with this decision.