Represented by AMS attorneys Lou Mastriani, Page Hall, Beau Jackson, and James Ton-that, Plaintiff Otter Products, LLC (OtterBox) successfully argued that the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) correctly decided that U.S. Customs and Border Protection erred in taxing imports of OtterBox cases at a 20% duty under harmonized tariff schedule (HTSUS) Heading 4202. In 2015, the CIT granted OtterBox's motion for summary judgment, finding that protective cases were more appropriately classified as "other articles of plastic" under HTSUS subheading 3926.90.99, at a duty rate of 5.3%. The United States appealed the CIT's decision.
The CAFC upheld the CIT's conclusion that OtterBox's products only "minimally resemble containers," and "it is more common to think of the cases an addition/accessory to the electronic device which can be added or removed at the consumer's liking." The result of this litigation should have major impacts on the classification of imported cases, coverings, and other items that protect electronic devices such as smartphones and tablets.
For the full text of the CAFC decision, click on PDF below.