Legal Opinion
Bausch & Lomb, Incorporated v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided July 8, 1998No. 97-1333PublishedCited by 173 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
PLAGER, Circuit Judge.
This case requires us to answer the question of whether an electric toothbrush is properly classified under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”) as a “toothbrush” or as an “electromechanical domestic appliance.” In the course of doing so, we have been asked by the trial court to clarify the circumstances under which summary judgment may be granted when there is a dispute over the proper classification. Because the Court of International Trade correctly adjudged the latter classification to be the proper one, Bausch & Lomb, Inc. v. United States,…
2Cases cited36 opinions
- Marbury v. MadisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1803
- United States v. MenascheSupreme Court of the United States · 1955
- Montclair v. RamsdellSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Orlando Food Corp. v. StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
- Universal Electronics Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1997
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by173 opinions
- Rocknel Fastener, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2001
- Dorbest Ltd. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2006
- Cummins Incorporated (Formerly Known as Cummins Engine Company) v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2006
- North American Processing Company v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2001
- Robert O. Mudge v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2002
168 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.