Legal Opinion

United States v. Dryden Rubber Co.

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided April 30, 1934No. 3733PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtGraham, Presiding Judge

A machine for cutting rubber was imported at the port of Chicago, and was classified by the collector under paragraph 353 of the Tariff Act of 1930, under the third division of said paragraph, which paragraph is as follows:

Par. 353. All articles suitable for producing, rectifying, modifying, controlling, or distributing electrical energy;

Electrical telegraph (including printing and typewriting), telephone, signaling, radio, welding, ignition, wiring, therapeutic, and X-ray apparatus, instruments (other than laboratory), and devices; and

Articles having as an essential feature an electrical…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Columbia Shipbuilding Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1922

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Seprol, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1962

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

Powered by the Exa API