Case Name: Silvine Importers, Inc. v. United States
Court: United States Customs Court
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1967-06-12
Citations: 58 Cust. Ct. 507
Docket Number: C.D. 3029
Parties: Silvine Importers, Inc. v. United States
Judges: Before Rao and Ford, Judges
Reporter: United States Customs Court Reports
Volume: 58
Pages: 507–507

Head Matter:
(C.D. 3029)
Silvine Importers, Inc. v. United States
United States Customs Court, Second Division
(Decided June 12, 1967)
Plaintiff not represented by counsel.
Carl Eardley, Acting Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.
Before Rao and Ford, Judges

Opinion:
Kao, Chief Judge:
When tbe above-enumerated protest was called for trial, there was no appearance on bebalf of plaintiff or its attorney. Defendant moved to dismiss the cause of action on the grounds of untimeliness of protest.
Keference to the official papers discloses that the protest was not filed with the collector of customs within the 60-day period after liquidation of the entry as required by section 514 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. § 1514). The protest is, therefore, untimely.
Defendant's motion is granted, and the protest is dismissed on the ground of untimeliness.
Judgment will be entered accordingly.