Distance measurement. Traverse distances are usually measured with a tape but are also measured by stadia, subtense, trig-traverse, and electronic methods. * Electronic methods. Medium- to long-distance measurements may be speeded by use of modulated infrared light or radio microwaves. The time a signal takes to travel to a distant receiver and return to the sending instrument is measured and converted to distance. Relative accuracy improves with distance, because errors are largely constant. In R. W. Smith v. United States, supra, and in Schlumberger Well Surveying Corp. v. United States, 54 CCPA 37, C.A.D. 901, special purpose instruments or devices having electrical features were held dutiable under paragraph 360, as surveying instruments. The merchandise in the Smith case consisted of docenettes or deviation recorders which, when suspended in an oil well in an approximately vertical position and held stationary, will indicate in a photographic manner the deviation from the true vertical and also the direction of the deviation. From the record presented the court concluded that the instrument measured angles and determined direction by means of photography which method is a recognized manner of surveying known as photogrammetric surveying. It held (p. 84): Upon the record herein, the cases cited, and definitions from the various lexicographers, we find that the docenette or deviation recorder, together with other parts involved herein, is an instrument used to measure the angle and direction of deviation from the vertical and, as such, is a surveying instrument within the purview of paragraph 360 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as classified by the collector of customs. Being a designation by use, the provision for surveying instruments takes precedence over the eo nomine classifications and over the descriptive provisions in paragraphs 353 and 372 of said act, as modified, supra, invoked by plaintiff. In Schlumberger Well Surveying Corp. v. United States, supra, the articles were described as "DCM-A Poteclinometer Cartridges" and were used with a dip meter sonde in connection with exploration leading to the production of oil. The court described their function as follows: The record admits of no doubt that, as and when used for its intended purpose, the cartridge is combined with the dip meter sonde and the combination is suspended in an oil well drill hole. The purpose and function of the cartridge is to indicate the orientation of the dip meter sonde. The cartridge accomplishes this purpose by measuring, in terms of angles, the direction in which the front or reference side of the cartridge is facing relative to the north-south direction, the degree which the cartridge is titled [sic] from the vertical, and the direction which the front of the cartridge makes with respect to the direction which the deviation or tilt will take. Turning now to the dip meter sonde phase of the combination, the record discloses that this instrument measures the electrical characteristics of the subsurface strata, for the purpose of determining the tilt or dip of the strata with respect to the horizontal. The orientation information secured through the function of the cartridge is essential in computing the dip or tilt of the subsurface strata. In addition, the instrument determines the orientation north-south of the strata, all in terms of angles. [Emphasis quoted.] The court pointed out that according to documentary evidence the combination determines the dip of subsurface formations, which knowledge is important to the geologist, drilling engineer, and reservoir engineer, and that its function is geological surveying. The court referred to dictionary definitions of "survey” and “surveying” and stated: *** In the light of the record before us, we are persuaded that while these definitions constitute authentic examples of the meaning of these terms, they do not impose a limitation thereupon. It therefore held that the cartridge was classifiable as a part of a surveying instrument. From these authorities it is evident that the term "surveying instruments" is not limited to the traditional or conventional ones, but that it includes instruments using modern technology and developed for special types of surveying. In the patent issued to Dr. Wadley, it is stated: This invention relates to a method or system for aiding in navigation, surveying or tracking by which information useful for determining the locus of a point P relative to other points A and B * * * is obtained by means of the wave transit times between the various points. [Emphasis added.] The brochures describing the Hydrodist MRB2 refer to it as the microwave system for use in hydrographic survey. Exhibit 3 states: The sextant-angle method, normally used to obtain a "fix" for the moving vessel, has certain disadvantages, the major being that work normally requires to be confined to periods of daylight with good visibility. A radio method of obtaining such a "fix" would enable work of equal, or possibly greater, accuracy to be continued regardless of weather or visibility-permitting, if required, around-the-clock operations for either survey craft or dredging vessels. Exhibit 3 also states that the Hydrodist is used in the Air Borne Supplemental control points for aerial mapping Power Transmission Line Towers Offshore facilities for oil drilling Offshore pipeline routes Although the witness indicated that there were various uses for the Hydrodist, he did not specify any except for hydrographic survey. There is nothing in the record to overcome the presumption arising from the collector's classification that these instruments were chiefly used for surveying. On the contrary, the evidence supports that finding. Plaintiff claims, however, that the Hydrodist is an entirety consisting of a radio-telephone system and a distance-measuring system; that the radio-telephone unit if imported separately could not be classified as a surveying instrument, and that therefore the entirety cannot be so classified, citing Garrard Sales Corp. v. United States, 35 CCPA 39, C.A.D. 369. The Garrard case involved automatic record changer units chiefly used in phonograph-radio combinations. When installed, the radio could not be operated while the combination was used as a phonograph and vice versa because there was but one amplifying and one loud speaker system. The court held that a radio and a phonograph were separate articles, which when combined constituted a distinct article which was something more than either, not classifiable as either a phonograph or a radio. The record changer unit was thus not dutiable as parts of phonographs. The court limited the decision to the facts presented by the record. It is clear that the radio-phonograph combination had two independent functions, neither of which supported the other. The radio was used alone for receiving broadcast sound and the phonograph was used alone to play records. The combination was thus more than a radio and more than a phonograph. In the instant case the Hydrodist employs a radio-telephone and a distance-measuring system, which have some elements in common. The sole purpose of the instrument is surveying. The radio-telephone is not used for any independent purpose, but only in support of the measuring aspect. The operators utilize the radio-telephone to determine how the master and remote units should be set up solely to carry out this function. While the Hydrodist is more than a radio-telephone, it is not more than or other than a surveying instrument. It employs various systems or techniques, including the radio-telephone, to carry out its only purpose, which is surveying. Plaintiff contends, however, that the Hydrodist is radio apparatus and is more specifically provided for as such under paragraph 353, than under paragraph 360, as surveying instruments. However, in Marconi Instruments, Ltd. v. United States, 38 Cust. Ct. 311, C.D. 1880, the court pointed out (pp. 318, 319): The provision in paragraph 353 relied upon by the plaintiff would appear to be very broad in its scope. It is not limited to what are commonly regarded as radio sets. On the contrary, the para graph enumerates radio apparatus, radio instruments, and radio devices. *** The lexicographic definitions comport with our own impression that the provision for radio apparatus, instruments, and devices was used by Congress in its broader sense and, unless, otherwise indicated, would include a device such as the K-302 klystron tube when used as a generator or producer of radio waves. In that case it was held that such Klystron tubes were classifiable as parts of radio apparatus, instruments, or devices under paragraph 353, as modified, rather than under the provision in said paragraph for articles suitable for producing, rectifying, modifying, controlling, or distributing electrical energy. This case is not authority for the proposition that the provision for radio apparatus is more specific than that for surveying instru ments. In United States v. United Geophysical Company, 38 CCPA 137, C.A.D. 451, it was held that radio equipment which did not give accurate or exact information and whose primary function was to detect objects rather than to measure distances did not have the degree of accuracy required by the articles enumerated in paragraph 368 and was properly classifiable under paragraph 353 as electrical signaling or radio apparatus. The function of the merchandise in the instant case on the other hand is to measure distances through the use of microwaves. This is a surveying function, and the authorities are in agreement, that surveying may be done by electronic methods. In the Hydrodist, the radiotelephone is used in aid of the surveying function and not for any independent purpose. Therefore, the Hydrodist is more specifically provided for as surveying instruments under paragraph 360 than as radio apparatus under paragraph 353. R. W. Smith v. United States, 41 Cust. Ct. 78, C.D. 2024. For the reasons stated, the protest is overruled and judgment will be entered for the defendant. (C.D. 3629) DICTAPHONE CORPORATION v. UNITED STATES American goods returned United States Customs Court, Third Division Protest 65/24901 against the decision of the collector of customs at [Judgment for plaintiff.] (Decided November 26, 1968) Robert A. Falise for the plaintiff. Edwin L. Weisl, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant. Before RICHARDSON, LANDIS, AND ROSENSTEIN, Judges RICHARDSON, Judge: The protest herein was submitted to the court for decision upon a stipulation which reads: IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between counsel for the plaintiff and the Assistant Attorney General for the United States, Defendant, as follows: 1. The merchandise marked "A" and initialed RWC by Import Specialist Robert W. Curley on the invoices covered by the protest herein consists of products of the United States which were exported for the purpose of assembly into articles and which were returned to the United States subsequent to August 31, 1963 without having been advanced in value or improved in condition abroad by any means other than by the act of assembly. 2. Duty was assessed upon liquidation because of non-compliance with certain Customs regulations relating to the duty-free entry of returned American articles. 3. On the basis of information subsequently furnished by plaintiff, the District Director is now satisfied as to the existence of all facts upon which entry of the merchandise under TSUS item 807.00 is dependent. 4. The protest is submitted for decision upon this stipulation. Accepting this stipulation as evidence of the facts we hold that the claim in the protest that the items of merchandise marked "A" and initialed RWC by Import Specialist Robert W. Curley on the invoices covered by said protest are free of duty under the provisions of item 807.00 of the Tariff Schedules of the United States is sustained. As to all other claims and merchandise the protest is overruled. Judgment will be entered accordingly. DAMAGED OR DETERIORATED MERCHANDISE-NONIMPORTATION-ALLOWANCE IN DUTIES-NONCOMPLIANCE WITH STATUTORY AND REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS Fruits and vegetables exported from the Dominican Republic and entered at Jacksonville, Florida, were assessed in liquidation at vari |