Hitachi Home Electronics (America), Inc. v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
1DissentReyna, Circuit Judge
I believe that 19 U.S.C. § 1515(a) requires Customs to act on the merits of all protests within two years, and that all protests not expressly denied within that two-year period are allowed by operation of law. Because I would find Hitachi’s protests at issue were therefore allowed but its duties were not refunded, I would reverse the Court of International Trade (“CIT”) and find that it had jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1581(i) to address Hitachi’s claims for refunds. I respectfully dissent.
I. Background
Hitachi commenced this action seeking to recover duties, plus interest, paid upon…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Williams v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- United States v. James Daniel Good Real PropertySupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- National Ass'n of Home Builders v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Lexecon Inc. v. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & LerachSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Escoe v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.