F. L. Smidth & Company v. The United States
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
NICHOLS, Judge.
We have before us a petition for review. Appellant; plaintiff below, is dissatisfied with a decision by the Customs Court, Second Division, 59 Cust.Ct. 276, C.D. 3141, holding that an importation of certain “steel tires,” which are parts of rotary kilns used in production of cement, were properly classified by customs officials under item 661.30, Tariff Schedules of the United States (TSUS) which provides as follows :
Industrial and laboratory furnaces and ovens, non-electric, and parts thereof................ 19 % ad val.
Appellant limits its case to the claim that the imported…
2Cited by33 opinions
- Jarvis Clark Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- Jersey Central Power & Light Co. v. Local Unions 327, 749, 1289, 1298, 1303, 1309 & 1314 of the International Brotherhood of Electrical WorkersCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1975
- Marcel Watch Company v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1993
- Amersham Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1983
- Karoware, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1977
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.