Palmer Import Co. v. United States

Donlon, Judge:

On calendar call at 'Seattle, defendant moved to dismiss this protest because it failed to state the paragraph of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified, under which plaintiff claimed that the merchandise is “Pro-perly dutiable at 12%%.” Plaintiff -tendered the official papers, and they were received in evidence.

Decision on defendant’s motion was reserved for this division, which has jurisdiction over the su-bjeot matter of the protest. The parties were afforded opportunity to file briefs on the motion. No briefs were filed.

In pertinent part, the protest reads as follows:

Notice of…