Administrative
The American Rolex Watch Corp. v. United States, protests 58/25127, etc. (New York); Paul Breguette Watch Co., Inc. v. United States, protests 58/25128, etc. (New York); Movado Watch Agency, Inc. v. United States, protests 61/13101, etc. (New York); Eterna Watch Co. of America, Inc. v. United States, protests 61/13878, etc. (New York); Concord Watch Co., Inc. v. United States, protests 61/19526, etc. (New York); American Rolex Watch Corp. v. United States, protests 65/19962, etc. (New York)
57 Cust. Ct. 821·United States Customs Court·1966
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Before the Second Division,
October 24, 1966
No. P66/289. —
No. P66/290. —
No. P66/291. —
No. P66/292. —
No. P66/293. —
No. P66/294. —
The American Rolex Watch Corp. v. United States, protests 58/25127, etc. (New York). Paul Breguette Watch Co., Inc. v. United States, protests 58/25128, etc. (New York). Movado Watch Agency, Inc. v. United States, protests 61/13101, etc. (New York). Eterna Watch Co. of America, Inc. v. United States, protests 61/13878, etc. (New York). Concord Watch Co., Inc. v. United States, protests 61/19526, etc. (New York). American Rolex Watch Corp. v. United States, protests 65/19962, etc. (New York).
[MAJORITY — Rao, C. J.]
Rao, C. J.
In accordance with, stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of watch movements similar in all material respects to those the subject of Benrus Watch Company et al. v. United States (53 Cust. Ct. 28, C.D. 2469), wherein said watch movements were held to be unadjusted and, accordingly, not subject to any additional duty for adjustments, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.