Parksmith Corp. v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

Parksmith Corp. v. United States

68 Cust. Ct. 5, 1972 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 2582

CourtUnited States Customs Court

DecidedJanuary 10, 1972

DocketC.D. 4323

StatusPublished

This text of 68 Cust. Ct. 5 (Parksmith Corp. 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

Parksmith Corp. v. United States, 68 Cust. Ct. 5, 1972 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 2582 (cusc 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Richardson, Judge:

Defendant moves under Rule 10.3(a) for an order consolidating certain actions for all purposes; and the motion is not opposed by the plaintiff. Defendant’s motion is disposed of as follows:

As to the action enumerated in the attached Schedule identified with the suffix (A) the motion and the said action are dismissed for prematurity by reason of the fact that in contravention of 19 U.S.C.A., section 1503(a) (section 503(a), Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1953) liquidation of the subject entry was not made upon a -final appraised value, and as such, is void, liquidation having taken place within 60 days of the date of the appraiser’s report. See United States v. Boston Paper Board Co., 23 CCPA 372, T.D. 48233 (1936), and other cases cited in Memorandum to Accompany Order in Lamb-Weston, Inc. v. United States, protest 69/38803, C.D. 4301, decided December 1,1971. It is the duty of the regional commissioner of customs to liquidate the involved entry in the manner provided for by law so that plaintiff may file a valid protest against said entry if it be so advised.

As to the actions enumerated in the said Schedule identified with the suffix (B) the motion, being unopposed and within the court’s jurisdiction, is granted, and the said actions will be consolidated under iead number 69/26905.

Schedule oe Actions

69/19226 (A)

69/26905 (B)

69/28668 (B)

69/29005 (B)

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

Richardson, Judge:

Defendant moves under Rule 10.3(a) for an order consolidating certain actions for all purposes; and the motion is not opposed by the plaintiff. Defendant’s motion is disposed of as follows:

As to the action enumerated in the attached Schedule identified with the suffix (A) the motion and the said action are dismissed for prematurity by reason of the fact that in contravention of 19 U.S.C.A., section 1503(a) (section 503(a), Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1953) liquidation of the subject entry was not made upon a -final appraised value, and as such, is void, liquidation having taken place within 60 days of the date of the appraiser’s report. See United States v. Boston Paper Board Co., 23 CCPA 372, T.D. 48233 (1936), and other cases cited in Memorandum to Accompany Order in Lamb-Weston, Inc. v. United States, protest 69/38803, C.D. 4301, decided December 1,1971. It is the duty of the regional commissioner of customs to liquidate the involved entry in the manner provided for by law so that plaintiff may file a valid protest against said entry if it be so advised.

As to the actions enumerated in the said Schedule identified with the suffix (B) the motion, being unopposed and within the court’s jurisdiction, is granted, and the said actions will be consolidated under iead number 69/26905.

Schedule oe Actions

69/19226 (A)

69/26905 (B)

69/28668 (B)

69/29005 (B)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

68 Cust. Ct. 5, 1972 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 2582, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/parksmith-corp-v-united-states-cusc-1972.