Home/U.S. Customs Court/Organon, Inc. v. United States

Organon, Inc. v. United States

59 Cust. Ct. 363, 275 F. Supp. 149, 1967 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 2145
CourtUnited States Customs Court
DecidedOctober 23, 1967
DocketC.D. 3170
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 59 Cust. Ct. 363 (Organon, Inc. v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Customs Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Organon, Inc. v. United States, 59 Cust. Ct. 363, 275 F. Supp. 149, 1967 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 2145 (cusc 1967).

Opinion

WatsoN, Judge:

The merchandise involved in the case at bar is described on the invoice as “A.C.T.H. (Cortrophin Powder C.M.C.)”, and consists of certain adreno-corticotrophic hormones commonly known and referred to as “AOTH”, used in medicine for the treatment of certain diseases.

The importation in question was classified for duty under paragraph 5 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by the Torquay Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, T.D. 52739, at the rate of 12½ per centiun ad valorem as a nonalcoholic medicinal preparation, not specially provided for. Plaintiff claims such merchandise properly dutiable under paragraph 34 of said act, as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, T.D. 51802, at the rate of 5 per centum ad valorem, as a drug, advanced in value or condition. Plaintiff alternatively had claimed that said merchandise is properly classifiable free of duty under the provisions of paragraph 1669 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as a drug in a crude state, not advanced in value or condition. However, at the hearing of this case, counsel for the plaintiff formally abandoned this claim (E.2).

The pertinent provisions of the Tariff Act of 1930 herein involved are as follows:

Paragraph 5, Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by T.D. 52739:

All chemical elements, all chemical salts and compounds, all medicinal preparations and all combinations and mixtures of any of the foregoing, all the foregoing obtained naturally or artificially and not specially provided for * * *_12½% ad val.

[365]*365Paragraph 34, Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by T.D. 51802:

Drugs, such as barks, beans, berries, * * * and all other drugs of vegetable or animal origin * * *; any of the foregoing which are natural and uncompounded drugs and not edible, and not specially provided for, but which are advanced in value or condition by shredding, grinding, chipping, crushing, or any other process or treatment whatever beyond that essential to the proper packing of the drugs and the prevention of decay or deterioration pending manufacture, and not containing alcohol_5% ad val.

Paragraph 34, Tariff Act of 1930, reads in part:

* * * Provided, That the term “drug” wherever used in this Act shall include only those substances having therapeutic or medicinal properties and chiefly used for medicinal purposes: * * *.

The record in this case consists of the testimony of Mr. Berend Drenth, employed as factory chemist by N. V. Organon, of Oss, Netherlands, the shipper of the involved merchandise, taken by deposition (the direct interrogatories and answers thereto and tire cross-interrogatories and answers thereto were admitted in evidence as plaintiff’s exhibit 1-A and 1-B respectively), for the plaintiff, and also the testimony of Dr. Earl Pierson, employed by Merck and Co., Inc., Rah-way, New Jersey, called as a witness on behalf of the defendant. Attached to the deposition of plaintiff’s witness Drenth, is a so-called “flowsheet” (exhibit A in plaintiff’s exhibit 1-A) describing the manufacturing processes employed in the production of the imported product.

The “flowsheet” above mentioned describes the various steps in the production of the imported product as follows:

[366]

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

Related

Organon, Inc. v. United States
61 Cust. Ct. 662 (U.S. Customs Court, 1968)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
59 Cust. Ct. 363, 275 F. Supp. 149, 1967 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 2145, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/organon-inc-v-united-states-cusc-1967.