Micropoint, Inc. v. United States

77 Cust. Ct. 135
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Micropoint, Inc. v. United States. Read the opinion of the Court — 77 Cust. Ct. 133
United States Customs Court·Decided December 27, 1976·No. C.D. 4683; Court No. 76-3-00752·Published

Opinion

Memorandum Opinion and Order

Watson, Judge:

The disputed protests encompassed in this action were filed after the period allowed for their filing by 19 U.S.C. § 1514 (b)(2)(A). Thus one of the prerequisites for the exercise of jurisdiction by this court is lacking and they must be dismissed.

In addition, insofar as protest No. 2809-5-000886 protests entry Nos. 104642 and 106919, it is concededly moot. Insofar as protest No. 2809-5-000887 relates to entry No. 140371 in advance of its liquidation, it is premature and must be dismissed.

The memorandum opinion and order in Court No. 75-10-02567, 77 Cust Ct 133 C.D. 4682, discusses more fully the reasons for rejecting plaintiff’s argument that the statute allows an initial protest to preserve the importer’s rights with respect to later entries of the same merchandise or is otherwise so vague as to deprive the importer of due process of law.

For the above reasons, it is

Ordered, Adjudged and Decreed, that this action be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

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

Micropoint, Inc. v. United States, 77 Cust. Ct. 135 (cusc 1976).

77 Cust. Ct. 135 (Micropoint, Inc. v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related