Pillsbury Co. v. United States

1999 CIT 52
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Pillsbury Co. v. United States. Read the opinion of the Court — 18 F. Supp. 2d 1034
United States Court of International Trade·Decided June 23, 1999·No. 93-03-00161·Published

Opinion

Slip Op. 99-52

UNITED STATES COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE Before: Honorable R. Kenton Musgrave, Senior Judge

______________________________ : THE PILLSBURY COMPANY, : : Plaintiff, : : v. : Court No. 93-03-00161 : THE UNITED STATES, : : Defendant. : ______________________________:

JUDGMENT

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED THAT defendant United

States’ revocation of (1) the authority of plaintiff The Pillsbury Company (Pillsbury) to use the

Exporter’s Summary Procedure (ESP) in its duty drawback claims, and (2) Pillsbury’s blanket

waiver of pre-export notification requirements for substitution unused merchandise/same condition

drawback claims was contrary to law and void ab initio, and it is further;

ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED THAT any same condition drawback claims

filed by Pillsbury concerning exports of fresh asparagus shall not be denied by defendant on the

ground that Pillsbury did not provide defendant with advance notice of exportation of such goods.

____________________________________ R. KENTON MUSGRAVE, SENIOR JUDGE

Dated: June 23, 1999 New York, NY

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

Pillsbury Co. v. United States, 1999 CIT 52 (cit 1999).

1999 CIT 52 (Pillsbury Co. v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.