Case: E. Leitz, Inc. v. United States
Abbreviation: E. Leitz, Inc. v. United States
Decision Date: 1957-12-11
Docket Number: V. D. 57; Entry Nos. 777252; 962546; 804924
Citation: 39 Cust. Ct. 533
Volume: 39
Reporter: United States Customs Court Reports
Court: United States Customs Court
Jurisdiction: United States
Parties: E. Leitz, Inc. v. United States
Judges: 
Pages: 533–534

Head Matter:
(V. D. 57)
Entry Nos. 777252; 962546; 804924.
E. Leitz, Inc. v. United States
(Decided December 11, 1957)
Eugene B. Pickrell for the plaintiff.
■George Cochran Doub, Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Opinion:
Wilson, Judge:
This matter is presently before me on a remand from a classification proceeding decided by the first division of this court in E. Leitz, Inc. v. United States, 36 Cust. Ct. 391, Abstract 59812. The judgment entered therein stated: " that the matters be remanded to a single judge in reappraisement pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U. S. C. § 2636 (d)."
The matter has been submitted for decision upon an agreed statement of facts entered into by and between counsel for the respective parties hereto.
Upon the agreed facts, I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U. S. C. § 1402 (d)), to be the proper basis for determining the values of the involved merchandise and that such values were as follows:
Merchandise United States dollars per each
12 Polarizing Microscopes MOP, without front Collector and POEMP diaphragm and other parts_ $454. 44
12 wooden containers to fit_ 22. 96
5 Greenough Microscopes YEEUW_ 160. 04
5 wooden containers to fit_ 14. 40 less 25 per centum discount for each item
I further find such values to be the dutiable values of said merchandise.
Insofar as the matter relates to all other merchandise, it is hereby dismissed.
Judgment will be entered accordingly.