Fedtro, Inc. v. United States
United States Customs Court
1Opinion of the Court
Be, Judge:
The jurisdiction of the court has been duly invoked to determine the proper classification for customs duty purposes of certain merchandise described on the invoices accompanying the entry papers as “portable siphon pumps” and “automatic drain siphon pumps”. The merchandise was imported from Japan into the United States through the port of New York. It is covered by five protests which were consolidated for purposes of trial.
The customs officials classified both the portable siphon pumps and the automatic drain pumps within the purview of item 774.60 of the Tariff Schedules of the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Hirsch v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1913
- Durbrow & Hearne Manufacturing Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1919
- Durbrow v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1923
- Krueger v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1939
- Baker Ice Machine Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1940
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Pollard Bearings Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1973
- Rainin Instrument Co., Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2003
- Durst Industries, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1974
- Wagner Spray Tech Corp., Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2007