Evvan Importers, Inc. v. United States
United States Customs Court
1Opinion of the Court
Watson, Judge:
This action raises the question of whether stabilized turquoise is a semiprecious stone. The stabilized turquoise involved was low-grade, porous turquoise, mined in Arizona. It was stabilized by a vacuum process in which its pores were filled with clear plastic. This decreased its tendency to crumble when cut and also gave it a somewhat darker or “wetter” appearance. After stabilization the turquoise was sent to Israel for cutting and polishing.'
Upon importation, it was then classified as parts of jewelry under item 740.38 of the Tariff Schedules of the United States (henceforth…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- United States v. Cavalier Shipping Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1973
- United States v. Acec Electric Corp.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1973
- Britton v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1958
- United States v. Aceto Chemical Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1977
- National Lead Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1963
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.