Legal Opinion

Drygel, Inc. v. United States

United States Court of International Trade

Decided September 4, 2007No. Slip. Op. 07-134; Court 03-00832PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

TSOUCALAS, Senior Judge.

Plaintiff Drygel, Inc. (“Plaintiff’ or “Drygel”) challenges the classification of Gel-A-Mint® Magikstrips® (“Magik-strips®”) by the United States Bureau of Customs and Border Protection 1 (“Defendant” or “Customs”)under Subheading 2106.90.99 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”) covering “[flood preparations not elsewhere specified or included[.]” Plaintiff maintains that the merchandise at issue is properly classified under Subheading 3306.90.00, HTSUS, as “preparation for oral or dental hygiene.” This matter is before the court on…

2Cases cited17 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. Jarvis Clark Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
  4. Orlando Food Corp. v. StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
  5. Universal Electronics Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1997

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Drygel, Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2008
  2. Mondelez Global LLC v. United StatesUnited States Court of International Trade · 2017

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

Powered by the Exa API