covered by the above protests as paper weights, clips and mezuzahs, which were classified under Item 657.35, Tariff Schedules of the United States with duty at 15% ad valorem plus 1.275¢ per pound, and which are marked "A" and initialed MAD by Import Specialist M. A. D'Angelo. That said items marked "A" as above are in chief value of brass not coated or plated with precious metal and are of a type used for household or table use. Plaintiff limits the above protests to the claim for classification under Item 654.00 of the Tariff Schedules. Said protests are submitted for decision upon this stipulation. In view of this stipulation, which is accepted as an agreed statement of fact, we hold that the articles described on the invoices covered by the protests herein as paperweights, clips and mezuzahs, which were classified under item 657.35, Tariff Schedules of the United States, are properly dutiable at 10 per centum ad valorem under item 654.00 of said tariff schedules, as articles of a type used for household or table use, in chief value of brass, not coated or plated with precious metal. To that extent the protests are sustained. As to all other claims, they are overruled. Judgment will be entered accordingly. (C.D. 3548) THE GARCIA CORP. v. UNITED STATES Plastic boxes-Paragraph 397 United States Customs Court, Second Division Protests 64/17323, etc., against the decision of the collector of customs at the port of New York [Dismissed and remanded to single judge.] (Decided August 30, 1968) Siegel, Mandell & Davidson for the plaintiff. Edwin L. Weisl, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant. Before RAO, FORD, and BECKWORTH, Judges FORD, Judge: The cases listed in schedule "A," attached hereto and made a part hereof, have been submitted on a written stipulation reading as follows: IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between counsel for the plaintiff and the Assistant Attorney General for the United States: That the items marked "A", and checked HM (Import Spec's Initials) by Import Specialist Harry Menchenfreund (Import Spec's Name) on the invoices covered by the protests enumerated above, consist of plastic boxes, assessed with duty at 272 per centum ad valorem under the provisions of paragraph 1211 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified, and paragraph 1559, as amended, on the basis that said boxes are containers for fishing lines, and an additional duty of 19 per centum ad valorem under paragraph 397, as modified, and paragraph 1559 as amended of said Act, and in accordance with Section 504 of said Act on the basis that said boxes were unusual containers. That said plastic boxes are not containers for fishing lines, but are in fact separate articles of commerce and as such are not subject to duty under paragraph 1211 and Section 504, but dutiable at 19 per centum ad valorem under paragraph 397, Tariff Act of 1930, as modified, and paragraph 1559 as amended. That the matters herein be remanded to a single judge sitting in reappraisement for a determination of the value of the merchandise in the manner provided by law. That the protests be deemed submitted on this stipulation, the protests being limited to the items marked with the letter "A", as aforesaid. Accepting the foregoing stipulation of fact, we find and hold that there were no separate appraisements for the accompanying plastic boxes and fishing lines. Since it has been agreed by and between counsel for the respective parties that the plastic boxes and fishing lines are separate articles of commerce, the appraisement and liquidation are void. Accordingly, said protest filed against such void liquidation is premature, and the involved protests are hereby dismissed and the matter is remanded for further proceedings to a single judge sitting in reappraisement for determination of the separate value of the plastic boxes and fishing lines in the manner provided by law. Judgment will be entered accordingly. (C.D. 3549) NEW YORK MERCHANDISE Co. ET AL. v. UNITED STATES Raincoat and rainbonnet cases-Usual containers United States Customs Court, Second Division Protests 63/13360, etc., against the decision of the collector of [Judgment for plaintiffs.] (Decided September 9, 1968) Siegel, Mandell & Davidson for the plaintiffs. Edwin L. Weisl, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant. Before RAO and FORD, Judges RAO, Chief Judge: The merchandise covered by the protests listed in the schedule, annexed to this decision and made a part hereof, consists of raincoat and rainbonnet cases which were assessed with duty at the rate of 20 per centum ad valorem by similitude as provided in paragraph 1559 (a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1954, to other manufactures, wholly or in chief value of cotton, not specially provided for, under paragraph 923 of said tariff act, as modified by the Protocol of Terms of Accession by Japan to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 90 Treas. Dec. 234, T.D. 53865, supplemented by Presidential notification, 90 Treas. Dec. 280, T.D. 53877. It is claimed in said protests that said merchandise consists of the usual containers of the raincoats and rainbonnets with which they were imported, and, hence, it is dutiable at the rate of 121⁄2 per centum ad valorem, by similitude as provided in said paragraph 1559(a), as amended, supra, to other manufactures composed wholly or in chief value of india rubber, known as "hard rubber”, not specially provided for, finished or unfinished, under paragraph 1537 (b) of said tariff act, as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 82 Treas. Dec. 305, T.D. 51802. These protests have been submitted for decision upon a written stipulation of counsel for the respective parties hereto which reads as follows: IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between counsel for the plaintiffs and the Assistant Attorney General for the United States: That the items marked "A", and checked TOM, SHN AS (Import Spec's Initials) by Import Specialist Abraham Sheinfeld, John G. Thompson (Import Spec's Name) on the invoices covered by the protests enumerated on the schedule attached hereto and made part hereof, and assessed with duty at 20 per centum ad valorem under the provisions of paragraph 923, Tariff Act of 1930, as modified, and paragraph 1559 of said Act, as amended, consist of raincoat cases and rainbonnet cases, claimed to be dutiable at 121⁄2 per centum ad valorem within paragraph 1537(b) of said Act, as modified, and paragraph 1559, as amended, supra, as manufactures wholly or in chief value of india rubber, not specially provided for, other. That the raincoats and rainbonnets were classified within paragraph 1537(b), supra, and paragraph 1559, supra, at 121⁄2 per centum ad valorem. That said cases are, in fact, the usual containers of said raincoats and rainbonnets and are not, in fact, separate articles of commerce. That the protests enumerated on the schedule attached hereto and made a part hereof be deemed submitted on this stipulation, the protests being limited to the items marked with the letter "A", as aforesaid. Upon the agreed statement of facts, we hold the merchandise here in question, identified by invoice items, marked and checked as aforesaid, to be dutiable at the rate of 122 per centum ad valorem, as the usual containers of raincoats and rainbonnets, which are classifiable by similitude, as provided in said paragraph 1559 (a), as amended, to other manufactures composed wholly or in chief value of india rubber, known as "hard rubber", not specially provided for, finished or unfinished, under paragraph 1537 (b) of said act, as modified, supra. The claim in the protest to that effect is sustained. All other claims are, however, overruled. Judgment will be entered accordingly. (C.D. 3550) NORTH AMERICAN FOREIGN TRADING CORP. ET AL. v. UNITED STATES Earphones-Paragraph 353 United States Customs Court, Second Division Protests 66/68478, etc., against the decision of the collector of customs [Judgment for plaintiffs.] (Decided September 9, 1968) Barnes, Richardson & Colburn for the plaintiffs. Edwin L. Weisl, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant. Before RAO and FORD, Judges FORD, Judge: The suits listed in schedule "A," attached hereto and made a part hereof, have been submitted on a written stipulation reading as follows: IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, subject to approval of the Court, by and between counsel for the plaintiffs and the Assistant Attorney General for the United States, as follows: 1. That the items marked "A" and initialed GHL RHS JOB DL JS (Import Specialist's Initials) by Import Specialist Geo. H. Littlejohn Robert H. Schor J. O'Brien Dan Lustig J. Sollazzo (Im port Specialist's Name) on the invoices covered by the protests enumerated on Schedule "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof, and assessed with duty at the rate of 15% ad valorem under Par. 353 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by T.D. 51802, as articles in chief value of metal, suitable for controlling, distributing, modifying, producing, or rectifying electrical energy, consist of earphones, which are not suitable for controlling, distributing, modifying, producing, or rectifying electrical energy. 2. That said earphones are in chief value of metal, and have as an essential feature an electrical element. 3. That the rate applicable to articles in chief value of metal, and having as an essential feature an electrical element is in paragraph 353, Tariff Act of 1930, and as was modified by T.D. 55615 and T.D. 55816 to 12.5% ad valorem as to entries made between July 1, 1962 and June 30, 1963, and to 11.5% ad valorem as to entries between July 1, 1963 and August 30, 1963. IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the protests enumerated on Schedule "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof be submitted on this stipulation, the protests being limited to the items marked "A" as aforesaid. Accepting the foregoing stipulation of facts, we find and hold the items of merchandise marked "A" and initialed on the invoices by the designated import specialists to be properly dutiable as articles in chief value of metal, having as an essential feature an electrical element, at the rate of 12.5 per centum ad valorem, or 11.5 per centum ad valorem, under paragraph 353, Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by T.D. 55615 and T.D. 55816, depending upon date of entry. To the extent indicated the specified claim in these suits is sustained; in all other respects and as to all other merchandise all the claims are overruled. Judgment will be entered accordingly. (C.D. 3551) JAPAN FOOD CORP. v. UNITED STATES Alimentary paste United States Customs Court, Third Division Protests 64/19107, 64/19108, and 64/19112 against the decision of the collector of customs at the port of Los Angeles [Judgment for plaintiff.] |