U. S. Rubber Co. v. United States

U.S. Customs Court

U. S. Rubber Co. v. United States

20 Cust. Ct. 251, 1948 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 66

United States Customs Court·Decided January 15, 1948·No. No. 52117; protest 120507-K (Los Angeles)·Published

Opinion

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

The record showed that the imported merchandise is used in conjunction with other articles, not imported, in the manufacture or production of automobile tires. However, the record failed to establish that the imported merchandise is an integral, constituent, or component part without which the article to which it is to be joined could not function as such article. The evidence likewise failed to establish that the article to which the imported merchandise is to bp joined, is a machine, in and of itself. On the record presented the protest was overruled for failure of proof.

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

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

The record showed that the imported merchandise is used in conjunction with other articles, not imported, in the manufacture or production of automobile tires. However, the record failed to establish that the imported merchandise is an integral, constituent, or component part without which the article to which it is to be joined could not function as such article. The evidence likewise failed to establish that the article to which the imported merchandise is to bp joined, is a machine, in and of itself. On the record presented the protest was overruled for failure of proof.

U. S. Rubber Co. v. United States, 20 Cust. Ct. 251, 1948 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 66 (cusc 1948).

Pincite

20 Cust. Ct. 251 (U. S. Rubber Co. v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.