Permagrain Prods., Inc. v. The United States, 791 F.2d 914 (Fed. Cir. 1986). · Go Syfert
Search
Permagrain Prods., Inc. v. The United States, 791 F.2d 914 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
11 citation events across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Chevron Chemical Co. v. United States (cit, 1999-07-29)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Chevron Chemical Co. v. United States
Ct. Intl. Trade · 1999 · signal: see also · confidence low
See Nippon Kogaku (USA), Inc. v. United States, 69 C.C.P.A. 89, 92 , 673 F.2d 380, 382 (1982); see also Permagrain Products, Inc. v. United States, 9 CIT 426 , 429, 623 F.Supp. 1246, 1248 (1985), aff'd, 791 F.2d 914 (Fed.Cir.1986).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
PERMAGRAIN PRODUCTS, INC., Appellant,
v.
the UNITED STATES, Appellee
Appeal 86-555.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Jun 4, 1986.
791 F.2d 914
Craig E. Ziegler, Montgomery, McCracken, Walker & Rhoads, Philadelphia, Pa., argued for appellant., Joseph I. Liebman, Atty. in Charge, Intern. Trade Field Office, Dept, of Justice, New York City, argued for appellee. With him on brief were Richard K. Willard, Asst. Atty. Gen., David M. Cohen, Director, and Judith M. Barzilay.
Davis, Nies, Swygert.
Cited by 10 opinions  |  Published
NIES, Circuit Judge.

Permagrain Products, Inc. appeals from the final judgment of the United States Court of International Trade in Case No. 81-12-01644, entered September 4, 1985, 623 F.Supp. 1246, which upheld the United States Customs Service’s classification of the subject merchandise under item 202.60 of the Tariff Schedules of the United States (TSUS). We affirm.

OPINION

The imported merchandise was classified by Customs as “other hardwood flooring” under item 202.60 of the TSUS. Perma-grain challenged that classification, contending that the merchandise was properly classifiable as “hardwood lumber, rough, dressed or worked” under item 202.42 of the TSUS. The Court of International Trade, in a thorough opinion authored by Chief Judge Re, considered the extensive testimony and other evidence presented and held that Customs’ classification of the merchandise under item 202.60 of the TSUS was correct. Having considered Per-magrain’s arguments presented in the appeal, we are unpersuaded that the Court of International Trade committed any errors of law, or that any of its findings are clearly erroneous. See Daw Industries, Inc. v. United States, 714 F.2d 1140, 1142 (Fed.Cir.1983). We affirm on the basis of Chief Judge Re’s opinion.

AFFIRMED.