Legal Opinion
Carbon Activated Corp. v. United States
United States Court of International Trade
Decided September 8, 2014No. Slip Op. 14-103; Court 13-00366PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION & ORDER
CARMAN, Judge:
Before the Court is the Motion to Dismiss (“MTD”) of Defendant United States and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“Defendant” or “Customs”) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to USCIT Rule 12(b)(1), or, in the alternative, for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted pursuant to USCIT Rule 12(b)(5). ECF No. 13. For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants Defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Background
This action challenges Customs’ liquidation of three entries in 2008. See Compl. ¶ 12, ECF…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- McNutt v. General Motors Acceptance Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1936
- Miller & Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1987
- Juice Farms, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
- Hebei Foreign Trade and Advertising Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2011
3Cited by3 opinions
- Arp Materials, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2022
- Carbon Activated Corporation v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2015
- Arp Materials, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2022