Protests 102840-K of Mimosa American Corp.

U.S. Customs Court

Protests 102840-K of Mimosa American Corp.

15 Cust. Ct. 338

United States Customs Court·Decided November 30, 1945·No. No. 50728·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

It was agreed that from an analysis of merchandise analyzed by a Government chemist, synthetic resin was the component of chief value; that the articles in question are not laminated, nor made of laminated products; and that the synthetic resin did not act as a binding agent. Upon the agreed facts, it was held that the merchandise was excluded from classification under paragraph 1539 (b), following Lee & Schiffer, Inc. v. United States (12 Cust. Ct. 183, C. D. 850). There being no provision in the act for manufactures composed wholly or in chief value of synthetic resin, the claim at 20 percent under paragraph 1558, was sustained: (Rolls Razor, Inc. v. United States, 6 Cust. Ct. 271, C. D. 480, cited.)

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

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

It was agreed that from an analysis of merchandise analyzed by a Government chemist, synthetic resin was the component of chief value; that the articles in question are not laminated, nor made of laminated products; and that the synthetic resin did not act as a binding agent. Upon the agreed facts, it was held that the merchandise was excluded from classification under paragraph 1539 (b), following Lee & Schiffer, Inc. v. United States (12 Cust. Ct. 183, C. D. 850). There being no provision in the act for manufactures composed wholly or in chief value of synthetic resin, the claim at 20 percent under paragraph 1558, was sustained: (Rolls Razor, Inc. v. United States, 6 Cust. Ct. 271, C. D. 480, cited.)

Protests 102840-K of Mimosa American Corp., 15 Cust. Ct. 338 (cusc 1945).

Pincite

15 Cust. Ct. 338 (Protests 102840-K of Mimosa American Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related