Totes, Incorporated v. United States

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that the merchandise in Sports Graphics was not ejusdem generis with the listed exemplars because the imports had a “different purpose” and “the specific use [of the imported merchandise] was predominant over the more general description [of the listed exemplars]”
• noting that the essential characteristics are “organizing, storing, protecting, and carrying”
• stating that the merchandise in Sports Graphics was not ejusdem generis with the listed exemplars because the imports had a “different purpose” and “the specific use [of the imported merchandise] was predominant over the more general description [of the listed exemplars]”
• considering the examples listed in the Explanatory Notes when determining the proper classification for automobile “trunk organizers”
• classifying the imported goods under the more specific description and not the more general description, in accord with the greater specificity rule
• merchandise in Sports Graphics was not ejusdem generis with listed exemplars because the imports had a “different purpose” and “the specific use [of the imported merchandise] was predominant over the more general description [of the listed exemplars]”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).