WITEX USA V US, No. 08-1604 (Fed. Cir. 2009)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2008-1604 WITEX, U.S.A., INC. and MANNINGTON MILLS, INC., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee. Curtis W. Knauss, Grunfeld, Desiderio, Lebowitz, Silverman & Klestadt LLP, of New York, New York, argued for plaintiffs-appellants. With him on the brief were Robert F. Seely and Robert B. Silverman. Amy M. Rubin, Trial Attorney, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, of New York, New York, argued for defendant-appellee. With her on the brief were Barbara S. Williams, Attorney in Charge, and Jeanne E. Davidson, Director, of Washington, DC. Of counsel on the brief was Yelena Slepak, Attorney, Office of Assistant Chief Counsel, International Trade Litigation, United States Customs and Border Protection, of New York, New York. Appealed from: United States Court of International Trade Judge Donald C. Pogue NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2008-1604 WITEX, U.S.A., INC. and MANNINGTON MILLS, INC., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States Court of International Trade in consolidated case nos. 98-00360 and 00-00131, Judge Donald C. Pogue. __________________________ DECIDED: September 25, 2009 __________________________ Before SCHALL, PLAGER, and PROST, Circuit Judges. PLAGER, Circuit Judge. Witex, U.S.A., Inc. and Mannington Mills, Inc. appeal from a judgment of the United States Court of International Trade 1 that sustained the classification of its imported laminated panels by the United States Customs Service under subheading 4411.19.40 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). 1 2008). Witex, U.S.A., Inc. v. United States, 577 F. Supp. 2d 1353 (Ct. Int l Trade In a companion case decided today, Faus Group, Inc. v. United States, No. 2008-1605 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 25, 2009), we hold that similar products should be classified under HTSUS subheading 4418.90.40 (2001), which reads: Builders joinery and carpentry of wood, including cellular wood panels and assembled parquet panels; shingles and shakes: Other: Other. That holding applies as well to the merchandise at issue in this case. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the Court of International Trade. 2008-1604 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
