Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. v. The United States

Federal Circuit

Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. v. The United States

753 F.2d 1061, 6 I.T.R.D. (BNA) 1750, 1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 14705

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

DecidedFebruary 1, 1985

Docket84-1326

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 753 F.2d 1061 (Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. v. The United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. v. The United States, 753 F.2d 1061, 6 I.T.R.D. (BNA) 1750, 1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 14705 (Fed. Cir. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

753 F.2d 1061

6 ITRD 1750, 3 Fed. Cir. (T) 93

TOYOTA MOTOR SALES, U.S.A., INC., Appellant,
v.
The UNITED STATES, Appellee.

Appeal No. 84-1326.

United States Court of Appeals,
Federal Circuit.

Feb. 1, 1985.

William Brashares, Cladouhos & Brashares, Washington, D.C., argued for appellant. With him on the brief were Harry W. Cladouhos, Paul M. Laurenza and Mari-Anne Pisarri, Washington, D.C., of counsel.

Joseph S. Kaplan & John B. Pellegrini, Baskin & Steingut, P.C., of New York City, of counsel.

William A. Plourde, Jr. and David D. Laufer, Torrence, Cal., of counsel.

Saul Davis, Dept. of Justice, of New York City, argued for appellee. With him on the brief were Richard K. Willard, Acting Asst. Atty. Gen., Washington, D.C., David M. Cohen, Director, Joseph I. Liebman, Atty. in Charge International Trade Field Office, and Michael P. Maxwell, New York City.

Before BALDWIN, KASHIWA and NIES, Circuit Judges.

NIES, Circuit Judge.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the United States Court of International Trade sustaining the classification of certain cab chassis, imported from Japan from January 1980 to July 1981, under item 692.02 of the Tariff Schedules of the United States (TSUS).

The issues on appeal were thoroughly treated in the trial court's opinion reported at 7 CIT ----, 585 F.Supp. 649 (1984). Contrary to appellant's argument, Daisy-Heddon, Div. Victor Comptometer Corp. v. United States, 600 F.2d 799, 66 CCPA 97 (1979) is the most pertinent precedent and leads us also to conclude that the articles in question fall within the scope of item 692.02 (TSUS) as unfinished automobile trucks and not within either item 692.20 (TSUS) as automobile truck chassis or item 692.10 (TSUS) as other automobile trucks. Accordingly, we affirm on the basis of Senior Judge Maletz's opinion.

AFFIRMED.

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

753 F.2d 1061

6 ITRD 1750, 3 Fed. Cir. (T) 93

TOYOTA MOTOR SALES, U.S.A., INC., Appellant,
v.
The UNITED STATES, Appellee.

Appeal No. 84-1326.

United States Court of Appeals,
Federal Circuit.

Feb. 1, 1985.

William Brashares, Cladouhos & Brashares, Washington, D.C., argued for appellant. With him on the brief were Harry W. Cladouhos, Paul M. Laurenza and Mari-Anne Pisarri, Washington, D.C., of counsel.

Joseph S. Kaplan & John B. Pellegrini, Baskin & Steingut, P.C., of New York City, of counsel.

William A. Plourde, Jr. and David D. Laufer, Torrence, Cal., of counsel.

Saul Davis, Dept. of Justice, of New York City, argued for appellee. With him on the brief were Richard K. Willard, Acting Asst. Atty. Gen., Washington, D.C., David M. Cohen, Director, Joseph I. Liebman, Atty. in Charge International Trade Field Office, and Michael P. Maxwell, New York City.

Before BALDWIN, KASHIWA and NIES, Circuit Judges.

NIES, Circuit Judge.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the United States Court of International Trade sustaining the classification of certain cab chassis, imported from Japan from January 1980 to July 1981, under item 692.02 of the Tariff Schedules of the United States (TSUS).

The issues on appeal were thoroughly treated in the trial court's opinion reported at 7 CIT ----, 585 F.Supp. 649 (1984). Contrary to appellant's argument, Daisy-Heddon, Div. Victor Comptometer Corp. v. United States, 600 F.2d 799, 66 CCPA 97 (1979) is the most pertinent precedent and leads us also to conclude that the articles in question fall within the scope of item 692.02 (TSUS) as unfinished automobile trucks and not within either item 692.20 (TSUS) as automobile truck chassis or item 692.10 (TSUS) as other automobile trucks. Accordingly, we affirm on the basis of Senior Judge Maletz's opinion.

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

753 F.2d 1061, 6 I.T.R.D. (BNA) 1750, 1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 14705, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/toyota-motor-sales-usa-inc-v-the-united-states-cafc-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack