Legal Opinion
Rohm and Haas Co. v. United States
United States Court of International Trade
Decided May 12, 1983No. Court 80-9-01342PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LANDIS, Judge:
Plaintiff commences this action as an American manufacturer pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1516. The subject imported merchandise, sheets of acrylic resin (imported under the trademark “Plexiglas”) was entered at the port of New York in May, 1980, by Almac Plastics, Inc., the party-in-interest to this lawsuit.
The imported merchandise was classified pursuant to TSUS item A771.41 as flexible plastic sheets and was granted duty free entry under the Generalized System of Preferences as products from Taiwan. Plaintiff claims that the imported merchandise is properly classifiable as “other…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. MottleySupreme Court of the United States · 1911
- National Mutual Insurance v. Tidewater Transfer Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Dakota Central Telephone Co. v. South Dakota Ex Rel. PayneSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
- Federal Trade Commission v. Simplicity Pattern Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1959
- Cadwalader v. ZehSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Rohm & Haas Company v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- USR Optonix, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2005
- Interocean Chemical & Minerals Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1989
- Timber Products, Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2005
- Central Products Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1996
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.