United States v. Priority Products, Inc.
United States Court of International Trade
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion and Order
RESTANI, Judge:
This matter is before the court on defendants’ Rule 12(c) motion for judgment on the pleadings and defendants’ Rule 56(b) motion for summary judgment. For the reasons that follow, both motions are denied.
On February 26, 1985, the United States filed the amended complaint at issue against Priority Products, Inc., Walter L. Huss and Rosalie E. Huss. The United States is seeking to recover penalties stemming from the alleged fraudulent or negligent importation of bark tea into Portland, Oregon, after the tea was refused entry in San Francisco, California.…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Small Refiner Lead Phase-Down Task Force v. United States Environmental Protection AgencyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1983
- John v. CARR & SON, INC. v. UNITED STATESUnited States Customs Court · 1972
- United States v. John V. Carr & Son, Inc.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1974
- Melamine Chemicals, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1984
3Cited by10 opinions
- United States v. Modes, Inc.United States Court of International Trade · 1993
- United States v. Dantzler Lumber & Export Co.United States Court of International Trade · 1992
- United States v. RicciUnited States Court of International Trade · 1997
- United States v. Modes, Inc.United States Court of International Trade · 1989
- United States v. F.H. Fenderson, Inc.United States Court of International Trade · 1987
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.