Legal Opinion

E. Dillingham, Inc. v. United States

United States Customs Court

Decided October 2, 1970No. C.D. 4082PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Kao, Chief Judge:

The merchandise involved in this case consists of 50 pairs of molds for use with the “Bata Monoplax ‘Atlas’ Unit” for the production of plastic overshoes designated as “Susan Boots.” It was assessed with duty at 13% per centum ad valorem under paragraph 353 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by the Torquay Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 86 Treas. Dec. 121, T.D. 52739, as parts of articles having as an essential feature an electrical element or device. It is claimed to be free of duty under paragraph 1643 of said tariff act, as shoe machinery, in…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Decorated Metal Manufacturing Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1924
  2. C. H. Powell Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969
  3. Altieri v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969
  4. Gleeson v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1969

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Pistorino & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1978
  2. Theo. H. Davies & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1973
  3. E. Dillingham, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1975

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

Powered by the Exa API