Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

Warner-Lambert Co. v. United States

United States Court of International Trade

Decided June 21, 2004No. Slip Op. 04-74; Court 01-00056PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

AQUILINO, Judge.

This action has been designated a test case within the meaning of USCIT Rule 84(b). It contests revocation of U.S. Customs Service letter N.Y. 832151 (Sept. 21, 1988), which ruled that “Halls Vitamin C Drops” be classified under the tariff schedules of the United States as medicament. In HQ 958150 (April 7, 1998), however, the Service, which is now known as Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, came to conclude that the British merchandise at bar as plaintiffs trial exhibit 1, halls defensetm Vitamin C Supplement Drops, is sugar…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
  2. Marbury v. MadisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1803
  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. Orlando Food Corp. v. StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Warner-Lambert Company v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2005
  2. BASF Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2011
  3. Deckers Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2005
  4. Inabata Specialty Chemicals v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2005
  5. Berwick Industries, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2006

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

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

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API