Case ID: ccpa_58/html/0091-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Lane, Judge,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

(436 F. 2d 506)
    J. E. Bernard & Co., Inc. v. The United States
    (No. 5372, C.A.D. 1009)
    United States Court of Customs and Patent Appeals,
    February 4, 1971
    
      Barnes, Richardson é Colburn, attorneys of record, for appellant. Joseph Schwarts, Earl R. Lidstrom, of counsel.
    
      William D. Ruolcelshaus, Assistant Attorney General, Andrew P. Vance, Chief, Customs Section, Patríele D. Gill for tbe United States.
    [Oral argument January 4,1971 by Mr. Lidstrom and Mr. Gill]
    Before Rich, Almond, Baldwin, Lane, Associate Judges, and Nichols, Judge, sitting by designation.
   Lane, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The importer appeals from the decision and judgment of the United States Customs Court, First Division, which overruled its protest and sustained the classification of certain “meter irises” under item 722.32 of the Tariff Schedules of the United States as other parts for motion picture cameras. J. E. Bernard & Co., Inc. v. United States, 62 Cust. Ct. 536, C.D. 3822 (1969). The court below in a thorough opinion by Judge Maletz reviewed the legislative intent relative to the provisions here involved and we find it unnecessary to repeat since we conclude that the decision and judgment below are correct.

On consideration of the transcript of record, the briefs, the arguments on appeal, and our recent decisions in American Express Com pany. v. United States, 57 CCPA 100, C.A.D. 985 (decided May 28, 1970) and Costa International Corp. v. United States, 58 CCPA 48, C.A.D. 1003 (decided December 10, 1970), both cases cited by the ■appellant, we find no error in the decision of the United States 'Customs Court, reported supra.