In the Matter of the Complaint Against

 CONAN RESEARCH,
 P. O. Box 442 at
 Twinsburg, OH 44087-0442

 P.S. Docket No. 12/7

 June 11, 1987

 James A. Cohen Judicial Officer

 APPEARANCES FOR COMPLAINANT:
 Thomas A. Ziebarth, Esq. 
 Timothy J. Mahoney, Esq. 
 Consumer Protection Division
 Law Department
 United States Postal Service
 Washington, DC 20260-1112 

 APPEARANCE FOR RESPONDENT:
 Robert Steinberg
 8337 Old Eight Road
 Northfield, OH 44067-2717

Prior proceedings in this matter led to the issuance of False Representation Order No. 82-109, dated July 29, 1982, against mail addressed to Respondent Conan Research at the address contained in the caption of this proceeding. On May 12, 1987, Complainant filed a Petition for Supplemental Order, alleging that Respondent, employing a different address, is currently promoting a hair preparation and special shampoo using certain of the representations which were found to be false in the prior proceeding. The Petition further alleges that the preparation is substantially the same as Bio-Genesis, which was the product considered in the prior proceeding. Because the product and certain of the representations are essentially the same as those previously considered, Complainant requests that a supplemental False Representation Order be issued against Respondent at 210 Fifth Avenue, New York, New York 10010, the address to which remittances are currently being solicited.

By Notice dated May 14, 1987, Respondent was advised that if it intended to oppose the issuance of the order sought in the Petition for Supplemental Order, it must file its Answer not later than 10 calendar days from the date of receipt of the Petition. The Petition was served on Respondent on May 19, 1987. No Answer to the Petition has been filed within the time allowed or as of the date of this Decision.

By the Petition and the attachments thereto, a prima facie showing has been made that Respondent is evading or attempting to evade the provisions of False Representation Order No. 82-109 by conducting the same or a similar scheme using a different address. Accordingly, a Supplemental False Representation Order against Respondent at the address alleged in the Petition is being issued with this Decision.