Legal Opinion
United States v. A. Johnson & Co.
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided December 7, 1978No. 78-11PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Rich, Judge.
This appeal by the United States is from the judgment of the U.S. Customs Court, 80. Cust. Ct. 52, C.D. 4737, 450 F. Supp. 247 (1978), upon remand from our prior decision reported at 64 CCPA 164, C.A.D. 1196, 559 F. 2d 16 (1977), sustaining the importer’s;alternative classification. We reverse.
The merchandise in issue is described in our earlier opinion, 64 CCPA at 165:. The imported merchandise is invoiced, inter alia, as “Mairon Electolytic Iron Flake,” “Mairon” being a proprietary name by which we shall hereinafter identify the merchandise imported. Mairon is produced from a…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Commercial Shearing & Stamping Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1972
- American Express Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1968
- American Express Co. v. The United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1970
- A. Johnson & Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1978
- United States v. A. Johnson & Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1977
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Jarvis Clark Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- Nippon Kogaku (USA), Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1982
- Rosemary Fortin v. F. Ray Marshall, Secretary, Department of Labor, United States of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1979
- Daisy-Heddon v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1979
- S.G.B. Steel Scaffolding & Shoring Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1979
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.