Legal Opinion

Whirlpool Corp. v. United States

United States Court of International Trade

Decided July 18, 2007No. Slip Op. 07-111; Court 03-00526PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

WALLACH, Judge.

I

INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff Whirlpool Corporation (“Whirlpool”) challenges the decision of the United States Customs and Border Protection (“Customs”) to classify its imported merchandise (entry number 327-0126404-9) under Heading 9032 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”) 1999 as an “[a]utomatic regulating or controlling instrument! ] and apparatus” at a duty rate of 1.7% ad valo-rem. 1 This court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1581(a), and jurisdiction is uncontested by the parties. Because the subject merchandise is classified under an…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Orlando Food Corp. v. StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
  2. Carl Zeiss, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1999
  3. Universal Electronics Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1997
  4. Bausch & Lomb, Incorporated v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
  5. Totes, Incorporated v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Gleason Industrial Products, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2008
  2. Belimo Automation A.G. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2013

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

Powered by the Exa API