Case: Karl Schroff & Associates, Inc. v. United States, protests 63/8337-13425, etc. (Chicago); Karl Schroff & Associates, Inc. v. United States, protests 63/12262-13573, etc. (Chicago); Karl Schroff & Associates, Inc. v. United States, protests 63/15476-13679, etc. (Chicago); Karl Schroff & Associates, Inc. v. United States, protests 63/17404-13801, etc. (Chicago); Karl Schroff & Associates, Inc. v. United States, protests 64/1275-14098, etc. (Chicago); Dowst Manufacturing Company v. United States, protests 65/5752-14577 and 65/8656-14957 (Chicago)
Abbreviation: Karl Schroff & Associates, Inc. v. United States
Decision Date: 1967-11-27
Docket Number: No. P67/415; No. P67/416; No. P67/417; No. P67/418; No. P67/419; No. P67/420
Citation: 59 Cust. Ct. 909
Volume: 59
Reporter: United States Customs Court Reports
Court: United States Customs Court
Jurisdiction: United States
Parties: Karl Schroff & Associates, Inc. v. United States, protests 63/8337-13425, etc. (Chicago). Karl Schroff & Associates, Inc. v. United States, protests 63/12262-13573, etc. (Chicago). Karl Schroff & Associates, Inc. v. United States, protests 63/15476-13679, etc. (Chicago). Karl Schroff & Associates, Inc. v. United States, protests 63/17404-13801, etc. (Chicago). Karl Schroff & Associates, Inc. v. United States, protests 64/1275-14098, etc. (Chicago). Dowst Manufacturing Company v. United States, protests 65/5752-14577 and 65/8656-14957 (Chicago).
Judges: 
Pages: 909–910

Head Matter:
Before the First Division,
November 27, 1967
No. P67/415.
No. P67/416.
No. P67/417.
No. P67/418.
No. P67/419.
Karl Schroff & Associates, Inc. v. United States, protests 63/8337-13425, etc. (Chicago). Karl Schroff & Associates, Inc. v. United States, protests 63/12262-13573, etc. (Chicago). Karl Schroff & Associates, Inc. v. United States, protests 63/15476-13679, etc. (Chicago). Karl Schroff & Associates, Inc. v. United States, protests 63/17404-13801, etc. (Chicago). Karl Schroff & Associates, Inc. v. United States, protests 64/1275-14098, etc. (Chicago). Dowst Manufacturing Company v. United States, protests 65/5752-14577 and 65/8656-14957 (Chicago).
No. P67/420.

Opinion:
Eichardson, J.
In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of electric motors similar in all material respects to those the subject of Gamble Vargish & Co., dba Seabury & Co. v. United States (57 Cust. Ct. 448, C.D. 2834), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.