Pentax Corp. v. Myhra’s Empirical Analysis
72 F.3d 708 · 1995
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently April 2012
7 federal appellate · 2 district ·
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 19 U.S.C. § 1304 (Tariff Act of 1930) · 19 U.S.C. § 1592 (Tariff Act of 1930) · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (Federal Tort Claims Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1355 · 28 U.S.C. § 1581 · 28 U.S.C. § 1582 · 28 U.S.C. § 1631
Relies on United States v. Washington · Nebraska v. Wyoming · Mart Corporation v. Cartier Inc 47th Street Photo Inc · Hunt v. Robinson · Trayco Incorporated v. United States
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“If at the time of importation any article (or its container, * * *) is not marked in accordance with the requirements of this section, * * * there shall be levied, collected, and paid upon such article a duty of 10 per centum ad valorem, which shall be deemed to have accrued at the time of importation, shall not be construed to be penal, and shall not be remitted wholly or in part nor shall payment thereof be avoidable for any cause. Such duty shall be levied, collected, and paid in addition to any other duty imposed by law and whether or not the article is exempt from the payment of ordinary customs duties.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“) 17 exclusive jurisdiction of any civil action which arises out of an import transaction and which is commenced by the United States — 18 (1) to recover a civil penalty under section 592, 593A, 641(b)(6), 641(d)(2)(A), 704(i)(2), or 734(i)(2) of the Tariff Act of 1930; 19 (2) to recover upon a bond relating to the importation of merchandise required by the laws of the United States or by the Secretary of the Treasury; or 20 (3) to recover customs duties. 21 Id. A complementary statutory provision, 28 U.S.C. § 1340, confers upon the district courts”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the prudent thing to do is to direct the district court to transfer the case to the CIT so that the CIT can determine the question of its own jurisdiction.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.