U.S. Code » Title 19 » Chapter CHAPTER 24— BIPARTISAN TRADE PROMOTION AUTHORITY

19 U.S.C. § 3

DEFINITIONS.

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 19 CasesGoogle Scholar
“In this Act:“(1)Agreement.—The term ‘Agreement’ means the United States-Chile Free Trade Agreement approved by the Congress under section 101(a)(1).“(2) HTS.—The term ‘HTS’ means the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States.“(3)Textile or apparel good.—The term ‘textile or apparel good’ means a good listed in the Annex to the Agreement on Textiles and Clothing referred to in section 101(d)(4) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3511(d)(4)).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1945–2024 · leading case: Barr v. United States, 324 U.S. 83 (1945).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Barr v. United States, 324 U.S. 83 (1945). · cites it 4× “§ 242 , 19 U.S.C. § 3 ; § 624 of the Tariff Act of 1930, 46 Stat.”
St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. (Sur. for Carreon, Inc.) v. United States, 6 F.3d 763 (Fed. Cir. 1993). · cites it 3× “V On appeal, the United States contends that Customs has the discretion to collect the duties in the manner it deems appropriate, citing 19 U.S.C. § 3 (1988), which provides that “[t]he Secretary of the Treasury shall direct the superintendence of the collection of the duties on…”
Nat'l Fisheries Inst., Inc. v. United States Bureau of Customs & Border Prot., 637 F. Supp. 2d 1270 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2009). · cites it 2× “Defendant acknowledges that there was a “transfer of specific statutory functions” but asserts that this transfer did not include the transfer of authority under 19 U.S.C. §§ 3 , 66, or 1623. Def.’s Resp.”
Nat'l Corn Growers Ass'n v. Baker, 840 F.2d 1547 (Fed. Cir. 1988). · cites it 2× “Nothing in 19 U.S.C. § 3 , or Swartwout and its progeny, mandates the Secretary of the Treasury or the Commissioner to make retroactive changes in duties if he makes any change at all.”
Ford Motor Co. v. United States, 286 F.3d 1335 (Fed. Cir. 2002). “See also 19 U.S.C. § 3 (providing that “the Secretary of the Treasury shall direct the superintendence of the collection of the duties on imports as he shall judge best.”
Nat'l Corn Growers Ass'n v. Baker, 636 F. Supp. 921 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1986). “For example, no one disputes 19 U.S.C. § 3’s grant to the Secretary of the Treasury of the “superintendence of the collection of the duties on imports as he shall judge best” or the power to promulgate rules and regulations encompassed in 19 U.”
Am. Bayridge Corp. v. United States, 35 F. Supp. 2d 922 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1998). “See 19 U.S.C. § 3 (1994) (“The Secretary of the Treasury shall direct the superintendence of the collection of duties on imports as he shall judge best.”
Int'l Fid. Ins. Co. v. United States, 2017 CIT 64 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2017). “While Customs is entitled to deference and a presumption of correctness in the collection of duties and in its official acts, see 19 U.S.C. § 3 ; 28 U.S.C. § 2639 (a)(1) (2012), the court is mindful that the deemed liquidation provisions in 19 U.”
A Classic Time v. United States, 123 F.3d 1475 (Fed. Cir. 1997). “See 19 U.S.C. § 3 (1994) *1477 (“The Secretary of the Treasury shall direct the superintendence of the collection of the duties on imports as he shall judge best.”
6101 Tullis Drive, LLC v. Interstate Fire & Cas. Ins. Co. (E.D. La. 2023). “10-1 at 17 419 U.S.C. § 3 . 42 R. Doc. 12. 43 R. Doc.”
Jackson Avenue Mgmt., LLC v. Indep. Specialty Ins. Co. (E.D. La. 2024). “vel prone bfpiay DARREL JAMES PAPILLION UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 19US.C. § 3.”
Stemcor USA, Inc. v. United States, 2002 CIT 149 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2002). “Under 19 U.S.C. § 3 , “[t]he Secretary of the Treasury shall direct the superintendence of the collection of the duties on imports as he shall judge best.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.