Opinion

D. C. Andrews & Co. v. United States

  • 25 C.C.P.A. 437
  • 1938 CCPA LEXIS 25
Court
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Filed
Mar 28, 1938
Status
Published
Author
Garrett
On the bench
Bland, Garrett, Hatfield, Lenroot
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

DISSENTING OPINION

Garrett, Presiding Judge:

The proper classification of the merchandise here at issue presents a question which to me is somewhat difficult of solution, but I feel quite earnestly that it is not of the class provided for in paragraph 397. I think the “Articles or wares,” for which that paragraph provides, contemplate things capable of being plated, and •certainly that is not true of the merchandise before us.

I agree that it is not of a type classifiable under paragraph 389.

Upon the whole, it seems.to me, basing the opinion upon its nature and the testimony concerning it, that it falls fairly within the terms of paragraph 5 as a chemical compound.

Appreciating the fact that dissenting opinions in cases of this type are of no practical value, I shall not enter upon a statement of reasons. They have been given to my associates in conference. In a general way, it may be said that, except as to the possible applicability of paragraph 389,1 agree with the contentions of counsel for appellant.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.