## Facts

- Gilbert Equipment Company sought an ATF permit to import the USAS-12, a Korean-manufactured semiautomatic shotgun.
- Under the Gun Control Act, importation is limited to firearms “generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes.”
- ATF evaluated the weapon and Gilbert’s promotional materials.
- ATF found the USAS-12’s weight, width, and overall design were more suited to military combat than sporting use.
- ATF also relied on marketing materials that emphasized combat-oriented uses.
- ATF denied the import permit, and Gilbert sued seeking mandamus and declaratory relief, alleging APA violations and constitutional claims (due process, equal protection, and Second Amendment).
- The district court granted summary judgment for the ATF Director; the judgment was later affirmed on appeal without a published opinion.

## Issues

1. Whether ATF’s denial of the import permit was arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law under the Administrative Procedure Act.
2. Whether the permit denial violated due process or equal protection principles applicable to federal action.
3. Whether denying importation of the USAS-12 violated the Second Amendment.
4. Whether mandamus could compel ATF to approve the import permit.

## Decision

- The court granted summary judgment for the ATF Director and rejected all claims.
- ATF’s “non-sporting” classification and permit denial were within statutory authority and supported by record-based findings.
- The denial did not violate due process or equal protection because the import restriction was a rational regulatory measure and was not discriminatory.
- The denial did not violate the Second Amendment as applied to import restrictions on a combat-style firearm.
- Mandamus relief was unavailable because ATF’s importability determination was discretionary and Gilbert lacked a clear right to approval.

## Legal Principles

- Under the Gun Control Act, ATF may deny import permits for firearms not “particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes.”
- Courts review ATF’s importability determinations deferentially under the APA and will uphold decisions supported by rational findings grounded in the record, including physical characteristics and marketing evidence.
- There is no fundamental constitutional right to import a particular firearm; federal import restrictions and classification decisions are generally evaluated under rational basis review for due process and equal protection challenges.
- Mandamus requires a clear, indisputable entitlement and a nondiscretionary governmental duty; it does not lie to compel discretionary agency determinations.

## Conclusion

The court upheld ATF’s denial of an import permit for the USAS-12, holding that ATF reasonably applied the Gun Control Act’s “sporting purposes” standard and that the decision survived APA review while also defeating due process, equal protection, Second Amendment, and mandamus claims.


Gilbert Equip. Co. v. Higgins, 709 F. Supp. 1071 (S.D. Ala. 1989)