Opinion · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

United States v. Volkswagen of America, Inc.

494 F.2d 703

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1974-04-18
Topic
general

PeR Curiam. This appeal is from the decision and judgment of the United States •Customs Court, First Division, 68 Cust. Ct. 122, C.D. 4348, 340 F. Supp. 983 (1972). The court sustained the importer’s protest against the classification of two types of paint respectively containing 33 and 33-42 per cent of alkyd resin under TSUS item 409.00 as “mixtures” in whole or in part of benzenoid products, holding the importations properly classified under TSUS item 405.25 as benzenoid “plastics material.” We affirm.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed United States v. Volkswagen of America, Inc.. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
1 opinion
UNITED STATES v. VOLKSWAGEN OF AMERICA,494 F.2d 703(C.C.P.A. 1974)
THE UNITED STATES, APPELLANT, v. VOLKSWAGEN OF AMERICA, INC., APPELLEE.
Customs Appeal No. 5511.
United States Court of Customs and Patent Appeals.
April 18, 1974.
Irving Jaffe, Acting Asst. Atty. Gen., Andrew P. Vance, Chief, Customs Section, Herbert P. Larsen, New York City, for United States.

Joseph F. Donohue, Donohue Shaw, New York City, atty. of record, for appellee.
Appeal from the Customs Court.Page 704
Before MARKEY, Chief Judge, and RICH, BALDWIN, LANE and MILLER, Associate Judges.
PER CURIAM.
[1] This appeal is from the decision and judgment of the United States Customs Court, First Division, 68 Cust.Ct. 122, C.D. 4348,340 F. Supp. 983(1972). The court sustained the importer's protest against the classification of two types of paint respectively containing 33 and 33-42 per cent of alkyd resin under TSUS item 409.00 as "mixtures" in whole or in part of benzenoid products holding the importations properly classified under TSUS item 405.25 as benzenoid "plastics material." We affirm.

[2] We find no error in the decision of the First Division or in the learned opinion which accompanied it. We therefore adopt the reasoning of the trial court and affirm its decision and judgment.

[3] Affirmed.Page 1285