2323007 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

COMMISSIONERS: Lina M. Khan, Chair 

Rebecca Kelly Slaughter 

Christine S. Wilson 

Alvaro M. Bedoya 

In the Matter of 

CYCRA INC., a corporation, and DOCKET NO. C-4794 

STEVEN CHADWICK JAMES, a/k/a CHAD 

JAMES, individually and as an 

officer ofCYCRA INC. 

COMPLAINT 

The Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that Cycra Inc., a corporation, 

and Steven Chadwick James, individually and as an officer of Cycra Inc. ( collectively, 

"Respondents"), have violated the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the 

Made in USA Labeling Rule, and it appearing to the Commission that this proceeding is in the 

public interest, alleges: 

1. Respondent Cycra Inc. ("Cycra" or "Corporate Respondent") is a North Carolina 

corporation with its principal place ofbusiness as 941 Old Hargrave Road, Lexington, NC 

27295. 

2. Respondent Steven Chadwick James, also known as Chad James, ("James") is an officer 

of Cycra. Individually or in concert with others, he controlled or had the authority to control, or 

participated in, the acts and practices of Cycra, including the acts and practices alleged in this 

Complaint. His principal office or place ofbusiness is the same as that of Cycra. 

3. Respondents have advertised, promoted, labeled, offered for sale, sold, and distributed 

products to consumers, including motocross, motorcycle, and all-terrain vehicle ("ATV") parts. 

4. The acts and practices of Respondents alleged in this Complaint have been in or affecting 

commerce, as "commerce" is defined in Section 4 of the Federal Trade Commission Act. 
Respondents' Business Practices 

5. Cycra has advertised, promoted, labeled, offered for sale, sold, and distributed motocross, 

motorcycle, and ATV products since 2019. 

6. From 2019 until at least May 31, 2022, Respondents represented, expressly or by 

implication, that their motocross, motorcycle, and ATV products are all or virtually all made in 

the United States. 

7. For example, Respondents' cycra.com website featured a banner visible across its 

product pages stating products are "Proudly designed, developed and manufactured in 

Lexington, North Carolina." See Exhibit A ( cycra.com). 

8. Cycra's social media accounts also claimed Respondents' products were all or virtually 

all made in the United States, including by stating Cycra products were "Proudly made in the 

USA" or "Made in the USA." See Exhibits B-C (Respondents' Instagram and Facebook pages). 

9. Respondents labeled more than 150 products with the words "Made in the USA" (the 

"MUSA Label") and, in numerous instances, included an image of the U.S. flag on packaging for 

these products. 

2 
See Exhibits D-F (product labels and packaging). 

10. In fact, many of the products Respondents have advertised, promoted, labeled, offered for

sale, sold, or distributed, including products advertised or sold with the MUSA Label, are not all

or virtually all made in the United States.

11. Between at least March 2019 and August 2022, Cycra imported at least 30 shipments of

parts or accessories from Asia and Europe.

12. In some instances, Cycra imported significant parts or materials that it incorporated into

products in the United States.

13. In other instances, Cycra imported finished products already packaged for sale with

MUSA Labels.

14. In at least two instances, Cycra imported shipments of finished products from Taiwan

already in packaging or ready to be packaged with MUSA Labels after receiving notice from

U.S. Customs and Border Protection ("CBP") that such origin labels were false.

15. Accordingly, Cycra's express or implied representations that its products are all or

virtually all made in the United States are false or unsubstantiated.

James's Knowledge 

16. At all times relevant to this Complaint, Respondent James has served as Cycra's Chief

Operating Officer and held day-to-day management responsibilities for the Corporate

Respondent.

17. Respondent James's responsibilities have included creating, developing, approving,

implementing, overseeing, or ensuring compliance with Cycra's policies regarding making

express or implied representations that products are made in the United States.

18. At all times relevant to this Complaint, James has had direct knowledge of Cycra's

overseas purchases and importation practices, as well as the advertising, labeling, offering for

sale, sale, or distribution of partially or wholly imported products.

19. James has served as Cycra's primary point of contact with CBP, and, in numerous

instances, corresponded with CBP agents regarding appropriate origin labeling for Cycra

products and the incidents described in Paragraph 14.

Countl 

False or Misleading Made in USA Advertising Claims 

20. In numerous instances since March 2019, in connection with the advertising, promotion,

offering for sale, sale, or distribution of motocross, motorcycle, and ATV products, Respondents

3 
have represented, directly or indirectly, expressly or by implication, that their products are all or 

virtually all made in the United States. 

21. In fact, in numerous instances in which Respondents have made the representations set

forth in Paragraph 20, Respondents' products were not all or virtually all made in the United

States. Indeed, in numerous instances they were wholly imported or incorporated significant

imported components.

22. Therefore, Respondents' representations as set forth in Paragraph 20 are false or

misleading, or were not substantiated at the time the representations were made.

Violations of the Made in USA Labeling Rule 

23. Effective August 13, 2021, the Made in USA Labeling Rule, 16 C.F.R. Part 323 ("MUSA

Labeling Rule"), prohibits marketers from labeling products as "Made in USA" unless: (1) ''the

final assembly or processing of the product occurs in the United States"; (2) "all significant

processing that goes into the product occurs in the United States"; and (3) "all or virtually all

ingredients or components of the product are made and sourced in the United States." 16 C.F.R.

§ 323.2.

24. The MUSA Labeling Rule also provides that to the extent any mail order catalog or mail

order promotional material includes a seal, mark, tag, or stamp labeling a product "Made in

USA," such label must comply with the requirements of 16 C.F.R. § 323.2. 16 C.F.R. § 323.3.

25. For purposes of the MUSA Labeling Rule, "Made in USA" is defined as "any unqualified

representation, express or implied, that a product or service, or a specified component thereof, is

of U.S. origin, including, but not limited to, a representation that such product or service is

'made,' 'manufactured,' 'built,' 'produced,' 'created,' or 'crafted' in the United States or in

America, or any other unqualified U.S.-origin claim." 16 C.F.R. § 323.1.

26. A violation of the MUSA Labeling Rule constitutes an unfair or deceptive act or practice

in violation of Section 5(a) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(a). 15 U.S.C.

§ 57a(d)(3) and 16 C.F.R. § 323.4.

Count II 

MUSA Labeling Rule Violations 

27. In numerous instances since August 13, 2021, Respondents labeled motocross,

motorcycle, and ATV products as Made in the USA.

28. In fact, in numerous instances, these products were not Made in the USA. Such products

were not all or virtually all made in the United States because they were wholly imported or

contained significant imported components.

29. Therefore, Respondents' acts or practices as set forth in Paragraph 27 violate the MUSA

Labeling Rule.

4 
Violations of Section 5 

30. The acts and practices of Respondents as alleged in this Complaint constitute unfair or 

deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce in violation of Section 5(a) of the Federal 

Trade Commission Act. 

THEREFORE, the Federal Trade Commission this 30th day of May, 2023 has issued 

this Complaint against Respondents. 

By the Commission. 

April J. Tabor 

Secretary 

SEAL: 

5