Guy B. Barham Co. v. United States

60 Cust. Ct. 1033, 1968 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1883
United States Customs Court·Decided April 10, 1968·No. No. P68/203; protests 63/6678, 63/8684, and 63/18822 (Los Angeles)·Published

Opinion

Watson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the items of merchandise marked “B” covered by the foregoing protests consist of rattancore coolie hat planters, sleighs, modern shaped trays, serving trays, snack trays, and hanging planters similar in all material respects to those the subject of Royal Cathay Trading Co. and W. J. Byrnes & Co. et al. v. United States (56 Cust. Ct. 371, C.D. 2662); that the items of merchandise marked “C” consist of rattancore and reed Kleenex tissue box covers similar in all material respects to those the subject of Quon Quon Company v. United States (41 Cust. Ct. 178, C.D. 2038); that the items of merchandise marked “F” consist of rattan suitcases and valises similar in all material respects to those the subject of Royal Cathay Trading Co. and W. J. Byrnes & Co. v. United States (45 Cust. Ct. 99, C.D. 2206); and that the items of merchandise marked “G” consist of trays, serving trays, display trees, etc., which are in no part of rattan, similar in all material respects to those the subject of Quon Quon Company v. United States (48 Cust. Ct. 440, Abstract 66729), the claims of the plaintiffs were sustained.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Guy B. Barham Co. v. United States, 60 Cust. Ct. 1033, 1968 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1883 (cusc 1968).

60 Cust. Ct. 1033 (Guy B. Barham Co. v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Quon Quon Co. v. United States
41 Cust. Ct. 178 (U.S. Customs Court, 1958)
Royal Cathay Trading Co. v. United States
45 Cust. Ct. 99 (U.S. Customs Court, 1960)
Quon Quon Co. v. United States
48 Cust. Ct. 440 (U.S. Customs Court, 1962)
Royal Cathay Trading Co. v. United States
56 Cust. Ct. 371 (U.S. Customs Court, 1966)