In the Matter of the Complaint Against

 E.R.R.
 P. O. Box 344 at
 Cleveland, TN 37311

 P.S. Docket No. 7/89;  
 
 02/22/80
 
 Cohen, James A.  

 APPEARANCE FOR COMPLAINANT:
 Kristin L. Malmberg, Esq.
 Consumer Protection Division
 Law Department
 United States Postal Service
 Washington, D.C.  20260

 APPEARANCE FOR RESPONDENT
 Mr. Elmer R. Renner
 E.R.R. P. O. Box 344
 Cleveland, TN 37311

Respondent has appealed from the Initial Decision of Chief Administrative Law Judge William A. Duvall in which Judge Duvall recommends the issuance of an order under 39 U.S.C. § 3005, based on his conclusion that Respondent, by means of advertising for a "salvation for arthritis" is engaged in a scheme for obtaining money through the mail by means of false representations. Respondent claims that the Initial Decision is in error in concluding that it advertises a cure for arthritis. It also alleges it is entitled to have this matter considered by a jury. Each of Respondent's contentions is considered below.

I. Representation in Respondent's Advertisement

Respondent's advertisement states that its product is "My Salvation for Arthrities." The question presented iswhether the Initial Decision was correct in concluding that this statement represents a cure for arthritis.

In determining what representations are made by an advertisement, the advertisement is to be viewed in its totality and the impression it would most probably create on ordinary persons Donaldson v. Read Magazine, 333 U.S. 178 (1948). When the word "for" is coupled with the word "salvation" a reasonable implication of the language and a probable inference drawn by ordinary persons is that the product will cure the disease named in the advertisement which is arthritis. See Aronberg v. F.T.C., 132 F.2d 165, 168 (7th Cir. 1942); Hall v. United States, 267 Fed. 795, 797 (5th Cir. 1920); Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language (1964); II The Compact Edition of the Oxford English Dictionary (1971). Moreover, Respondent's advertisement clearly represents its product will provide relief from arthritis. The evidence in the record clearly establishes that Respondent's product will not cure or provide relief from arthritis (Tr. 11-15). Accordingly, it is concluded that the Initial Decision properly found that Respondent represents that its product will provide relief from and cure arthritis, which representations are materially false.

II. Right to Jury Trial

Respondent suggests in its appeal letter that it is entitled to have the allegations of the complaint considered in a jury trial. Neither the Constitution, the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. ??551-559, nor the Postal Service Statute, 39 U.S.C. § 3005, or regulations, 39 CFR § 952, require or provide for a jury trial at any stage of the administrative proceeding. See Donaldson v. Read, supra; Lydia Feldman, P.S. Docket No. 1/202 (I.D. 1973); Davis, Administrative Law Treatise § 8.16 (1958) Ed with 1976 Supp). Accordingly, Respondent's exception in this regard provides no basis for relief.

Based on a consideration of Respondent's exceptions as well as the entire record, it is concluded that the Initial Decision correctly found that Respondent is engaged in a scheme for obtaining money through tMR.181 by means of materially false representations. Accordingly, Respondent's exceptions on appeal are denied and a remedial order under 39 U.S.C. § 3005 is being issued contemporaneously with this decision.