Legal Opinion

GoPro, Inc. v. United States

United States Court of International Trade

Decided December 28, 2023No. 20-00176Published

1Opinion of the Court

Consol. Court No. 20-00176 Page 2 Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”).1 The subject merchandise encompasses GoPro’s camera housings for use with its HERO action cameras. Customs classified the subject merchandise within Heading 4202.99.9000, which covers “camera cases” and “similar containers,” and carries a 20% ad valorem duty. GoPro contests Customs’ classifications and argues that the camera housings should be classified within subheading 8529.90.86 as “[p]arts suitable for use solely or principally with the apparatus” of Heading 8525, and is free upon import. In the…

2Cases cited42 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Skidmore v. Swift & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
  4. United States v. Mead Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2001
  5. Christopher v. Smithkline Beecham Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2012

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

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

Powered by the Exa API