Newly Released CBP HQ Rulings for June 10
The Customs Rulings Online Search System (CROSS) was updated June 10 with the following headquarters rulings (ruling revocations and modifications will be detailed elsewhere in a separate article as they are announced in the Customs Bulletin):
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
H316751: Affirmation of NY N316281; Tariff Classification of Tomato Products from Mexico
| Ruling: CBP correctly classified the tomato products under heading 0702. |
| Issue: Whether diced and sliced roma tomatoes, diced and sliced round tomatoes, diced/chopped grape tomatoes, and a pico de gallo mixture comprised of roma tomatoes or round tomatoes, onions, jalapenos, and green bell peppers are classifiable as fresh or chilled tomatoes in heading 0702 or as prepared or preserved tomatoes of heading 2002. At the manufacturing facility, the products are prepared on extensive proprietary equipment by washing, slicing, or dicing the vegetables, removing the gelatin, seeds, and stems, adding certain chemicals, and packaging the final products for export. The tomatoes are refrigerated during processing and shipment. |
| Reason: The processing of the tomato products at-issue does not rise to the long-standing CBP understanding of the terms “preserved” or “prepared” for classification in heading 2002 |
| Ruling Date: June 9, 2021 |
H318556: Country of Origin Marking of Electrical Wire Cables
| Ruling: The cables must be marked as made in India or Australia. Acceptable alternatives include "Made in India, Further Processed in South Korea" or "Made in Australia, Further Processed in South Korea." |
| Issue: Whether cables CBP previously found to originate in India or Australia, but that are actually made in South Korea from Indian and Australian wire, may be marked made with aluminum from Australia" or India, or made in South Korea from Indian or Australian wire. |
| Reason: The country of origin of the electrical wire cables is either India or Australia. As such, the electrical wire cables must be marked to indicate clearly and explicitly the countries of origin as either India or Australia. None of the proposed marks contain either phrase indicating proper origin. Instead, they read “Made in South Korea.” |
| Ruling Date: June 8, 2021 |
H290374: Request to reconsider CBP ruling HQ H277699 (March 6, 2017); Classification of a Butt Welding Pivot Elbow
| Ruling: CBP correctly classified the pivot elbow in subheading 7307.93.30, which provides for “Tube or pipe fittings (for example, couplings, elbows, sleeves), of iron or steel: Butt welding fittings: With an inside diameter of less than 360 mm: Of iron or nonalloy steel." |
| Issue: Whether a pivot elbow that is part of a hydrostatic pivot irrigation system used in agricultural applications is classifiable as a tube or pipe fitting of heading 7307, or a part of a mechanical appliance for projecting, dispersing or spraying liquids of heading 8524. |
| Reason: Note 1(g) to Section XVI excludes “parts of general use” from classification under Section XVI. The specialization of the BWPE does not preclude its classification as a “part of general use” as defined in Note 2 to Section XV. The BWPE connects the bores of two tubes together or connects a tube to some other apparatus. This is precisely the function of “elbows”, which are included among the tube or pipe fittings of heading 7307. Also, the record does not support any conclusion that the subject BWPE is advanced or modified in any way to suggest that it performs additional functions beyond the above. |
| Ruling Date: June 8, 2021 |
H309124: U.S. Government Procurement; Title III, Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (19 U.S.C. 2511); Subpart B, Part 177, CBP Regulations; Country of Origin of Fixed and Portable Patient Ceiling Lift Systems
| Ruling: The lift systems would not be products of a foreign country or instrumentality designated pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 2511(b)(1). |
| Issue: The country of origin for procurement purposes of ceiling lift systems for use at a patient’s residence or healthcare setting. The systems are assembled in the U.S. from major components of Canadian, Mexican, U.S., Chinese, Canadian and Taiwanese origin. |
| Reason: The final assembly in the U.S. fully integrates the subassemblies, the tracks, and the above-ceiling attachments. The U.S. installation involves cutting struts using a band saw and cutting a threaded rod. The U.S. operations as described are complex and meaningful requiring significant skill, technical expertise, and quality control. As a result of the U.S. operations, the subassemblies are substantially transformed to produce the fully functional and operational fixed and portable patient lift systems. |
| Ruling Date: June 4, 2021 |
H315842: Ruling Request; U.S. International Trade Commission; General Exclusion Order; Investigation No. 337-TA-1174; Certain Toner Cartridges, Components Thereof, and Systems Containing Same
| Ruling: The printer cartridges are subject to the general exclusion order. |
| Issue: Whether newly designed printer toner cartridges are subject to the general exclusion order issued under International Trade Commission investigation 337-TA-1174. |
| Reason: The importer did not meet the burden to show the newly designed cartridges do not infringe the relevant patent. |
| Ruling Date: April 28, 2021 |
H315645: Ruling Request; U.S. International Trade Commission; Limited Exclusion Order; Investigation No. 337-TA-1118; Certain Moveable Barrier Operator Systems and Components Thereof
| Ruling: The garage door openers are nob subject to the limited exclusion order. |
| Issue: Whether garage door openers are subject to the limited exclusion order issued under ITC investigation 337-TA-1118. |
| Reason: The importer has met its burden to establish that its garage door operators do not infringe the relevant patents. The patent holder came to an agreement with the improter not to challenge the ruling. The importer will be required under the stipulation to file a certification with CBP. |
| Ruling Date: March 11, 2021 |