Legal Opinion

United States v. Weiss

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided April 20, 1925No. 2449PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGeaham, Presiding Judge

The articles imported in this case were classified for duty by the collector at 80 per centum ad valorem under paragraph 1428 of the Tariff Act of 1922. The report of the appraiser, made a part of the record, states: “The merchandise consists of certain clasps in chief value of metal designed to be worn on the person.” There are two official samples. Exhibit 1 consists of two circular pieces of metal, *15one fitted with an eye and the otter witR a hook. Mounted on each piece is an imitation semiprecious stone. The metal is a base metal, principally lead, and silver plated. Exhibit 2 is a highly…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Hamfton v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925
  2. Pritchard & Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1911

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. United States v. Briggs Manufacturing Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1926
  2. United States v. SaksCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1925

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

Powered by the Exa API