Legal Opinion

Starkey Laboratories, Inc. v. United States

United States Court of International Trade

Decided April 10, 1998No. Slip Op. 98-44. Court No. 91-02-00132PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

AQUILINO, Judge.

In this' action, which has been designated a test case within the meaning of CIT Rule 84(b), the plaintiff has interposed a motion for summary judgment, declaring that its predicate merchandise should have entered the United States free of duty as articles specially designed or adapted for the use or benefit of physically-handicapped persons within the meaning of item 870.67 of the Tariff Schedules of the United States (“TSUS”) or subheading 9817.00.9600 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTS”), depending upon individual dates of entry. The U.S.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Westminster Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1977
  2. Nobelpharma U.S.A. Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1997
  3. Glass Products, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1986
  4. Travenol Laboratories, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1993

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Starkey Laboratories, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2000
  2. Danze, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2018
  3. Starkey Laboratories, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2001
  4. Starkey Laboratories, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2001

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

Powered by the Exa API