Legal Opinion
Pistorino & Co. v. United States
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided October 11, 1979No. C.A.D.1234; No. 79-14PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Rich, Judge.
This appeal is from the judgment of the U.S. Customs Court, 81 Cust. Ct. 131, C.D. 4779, 463 F. Supp. 1311 (1978), dismissing *2appellant-importer’s protest to the classification of imported beam-cutting machines under the basket provision for machines rather then as machines for use in shoe manufacturing. We affirm.
The Imported Merchandise
The imported merchandise consists of beam-cutting machines and parts manufactured by “Fipi” and “Atom” of Italy, imported from 1972 to 1974 and entered at the port of Boston, Mass., for the account of Hudson Shoe Machinery Co. The different models…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- United States v. Carborundum Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1976
- Artmark Chicago Ltd. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1977
- Pistorino & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1978
- Cascade Corp. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1979
3Cited by8 opinions
- Aromant Usa, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2012
- Brother International Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2002
- United States v. Endicott Johnson Corp.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1980
- Amorient Petroleum Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1985
- A. J. Arango, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1981
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.