United States Federal Circuit

In a suit by an insurer seeking a declaration that bonds covering duties for imported goods, for which plaintiff was the surety, were unenforceable, dismissal for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction is affirmed where the true nature of the action was a challenge to a customs charge, a claim which could be raised in federal court under 28 U.S.C. section 1581(a), but only after plaintiff had brought a proper protest before customs.

Appellate Information

• Decided 10/08/2008
• Published 10/08/2008

Judges

• MAYER, Circuit Judge., Before MAYER, LOURIE, and PROST, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Federal Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Frederic D. Van Arnam, Jr., Barnes, Richardson & Colburn, of New York, New York, argued for plaintiff-appellant.   With him on the brief was Eric W. Lander.


• For Appellees:
  
• Michael J. Dierberg, Trial Attorney, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, for defendant-appellee.   With him on the brief were Jeffrey S. Bucholtz, Acting Assistant Attorney General;  Jeanne E. Davidson, Director;  and Franklin E. White, Jr., Assistant Director.   Of counsel was Beth C. Brotman, Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel, United States Customs and Border Protection, of New York, New York.