United Carr Fastener Corp. v. United States
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, Judge
The issue here is whether certain importations are more properly classified as a manufacture of metal,1 ms.p.f., as claimed by the appellant or as nuts of steel,2 as classified by the customs collector, The Customs Court overruled the protest, 56 Cust. Ct. 347, C.D. 2648, hence this appeal.
The importations, invoiced as “TEE-NUTS,” were imported by Northern Screw Corp. Pursuant to section 516 (b), Tariff Act of 1930, appellant filed a protest after liquidation proceedings concerning said importations. According to the court below, the record establishes full compliance with section 516(b) (19…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- United States v. May Department Stores Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1928
- United States v. Ben Felsenthal & Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1928
- United States v. FloryCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1927
- Kaufman & Vlnson Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1960
- Clutsom Machines, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1948
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- CamelBak Products, LLC v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2011
- Wagner Spray Tech Corp., Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2007
- CamelBak Products, LLC v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2011
- Mita Copystar America, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 1997