Legal Opinion

Mitel, Inc. v. United States

United States Court of International Trade

Decided January 9, 1992No. Court 89-11-00602PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

CARMAN, Judge.

Plaintiff, Mitel, Inc., moves for leave to amend and supplement its Complaint pursuant to Rule 15 of the Rules of this Court. The Defendant United States moves this Court for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Rules of this Court and dismissal of this action as it pertains to the denial of the Second Protest on the grounds that 19 U.S.C. § 1514(c) (1988) allows only one protest be made for each entry of merchandise and the filing of the Second Protest is time-barred according to the statute and Customs Regulations.

This Court denies…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hambro Automotive Corp. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1979
  2. Star Sales & Distributing Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1986
  3. Old Republic Insurance v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1990
  4. Computime, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1984

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Playhouse Import & Export, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1994
  2. Pollak Import-Export Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1994
  3. Design International Group, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2015
  4. Rogelio Salazar Cavazos v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2012

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API