Legal Opinion
Fedtro, Inc. v. United States
United States Customs Court
Decided June 13, 1974No. C.D. 4548; Court 71-6-00454PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
NEWMAN, Judge:
The parties in this civil action agree that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact, and have filed cross-motions for summary judgment pursuant to rule 8.2.
The merchandise in issue, described on the invoices as “Model CH-ACD Multi Purpose Deluxe Battery Charger with Silicon Diode”, was imported from Japan in 1970 and 1971. The regional commissioner of customs at the port of New York classified the merchandise as “rectifying apparatus”, and assessed duty at the rate of 10 or 9 per centum ad valorem, depending upon the date of entry, under item 682.60 of the Tariff…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- The United States v. New York Merchandise Co., Inc.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1970
- Trans-Atlantic Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1973
- E. Green & Son (New York), Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1971
- Tanross Supply Co., Inc. v. The United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1970
- Lyons Export & Import, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1972
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Digital Equipment Corporation v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1990
- Ashflash Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1976
- ASEA, INC. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1984
- Sanyo Electric Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1980
- Digital Equipment Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1988
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.