Legal Opinion
Maxcell Bioscience, Inc. v. United States
United States Court of International Trade
Decided December 18, 2007No. Slip Op. 07-180; Court 04-00254Published
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
RIDGWAY, Judge.
At issue in this action is the tariff classification of MetaBérry and Aloe Gold, two liquid “dietary supplements” imported from Korea by plaintiff MaxCell BioSci-ences, Inc. in 2002 and 2003.
The Bureau of Customs and Border Protection 1 liquidated the subject entries of the two products under subheading 2106.90.99 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”). 2 That subheading covers “[f]ood preparations not elsewhere specified or included,” which are dutiable at the rate of 6.4% ad valorem. MaxCell claims that the merchandise is instead classifiable…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Skidmore v. Swift & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- United States v. Mead Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Bausch & Lomb, Incorporated v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
- Mita Copystar America v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1994
- United States v. Carborundum Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1976
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.