AN Deringer, Inc. v. United States

• Decision Date: 08 August 1968
• Docket Number: Protest 67/18316-4076.,C.D. 3530
• Citation: 287 F. Supp. 1016
• Parties: A. N. DERINGER, INC. v. UNITED STATES.
• Court: U.S. Court of Customs and Patent Appeals (CCPA)

287 F. Supp. 1016

A. N. DERINGER, INC. v. UNITED STATES.

C.D. 3530; Protest 67/18316-4076.

United States Customs Court, First Division.

August 8, 1968.

Barnes, Richardson & Colburn, New York City (Joseph Schwartz, New York City, of counsel), for plaintiff.

Edwin L. Weisl, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen. (Steven R. Sosnov, New York City, trial attorney), for defendant.

Before WATSON and MALETZ, Judges.

MALETZ, Judge:

This case involves the proper classification of four shipments of certain wedgeshaped wooden articles that were imported from Canada in 1965 and 1966 and described on the invoices as "horsefeathers." They were classified by the government under item 207.00 of the Tariff Schedules of the United States as articles of wood, not specially provided for, and assessed with duty at the rate of 16 2/3 percent ad valorem. Plaintiff claims that the imports are properly classifiable under item 202.03 of the tariff schedules as rough spruce lumber dutiable at the rate of 35 cents per thousand feet, board measure.¹

The pertinent provisions of the Tariff Schedules of the United States are quoted below:

                                  Assessed under
                         Schedule 2, part 1, subpart F
                         Subpart F headnotes
                        1. This subpart covers all products of wood
                         which are not provided for elsewhere in the
                         tariff schedules
                Item                  Articles                   Rates of Duty
                                                                         1
                207.00   Articles not specially provided for
                          of wood                                16 2/3 % ad val
                                  Claimed under:
                         Schedule 2, part 1, subpart B
                         Subpart B headnotes:
                          1. This subpart covers lumber, wood siding,
                          wood flooring, wood moldings, and certain wood
                
                

                          carvings and ornaments, including such products
                          when they have been drilled or treated.
                            2. For the purposes of this part, the following
                          terms have the meanings hereby assigned to
                          them:
                                (a) Lumber: A product of a sawmill or
                          sawmill and planing mill derived from a log by
                          lengthwise sawing which, in its original sawed
                          condition, has at least 2 approximately parallel
                          flat longitudinal sawed surfaces, and which may
                          be rough, dressed, or worked, as set forth below:
                          (i) rough lumber is lumber just as it comes
                              from the saw, whether in the original
                              sawed size or edged, resawn, crosscut, or
                              trimmed to smaller sizes;
                         (ii) dressed lumber is lumber which has been
                              dressed or surfaced by planing on at least
                              one edge or face; and
                        (iii) worked lumber is lumber which has been
                              matched (provided with a tongued-and-grooved
                              joint at the edges or ends), shiplapped
                              (provided with a rabbeted or lapped
                              joint at the edges), or patterned (shaped
                              at the edges or on the faces to a patterned
                              or molder form) on a matching machine,
                              sticker, or molder.
                        *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
                            3. Lumber, including certain flooring provided
                          for in this subpart, is dutiable on the basis of
                          "board measure" for which the unit of measurement
                          is the board foot. For the purposes of
                          this subpart, a board foot is the quantity of
                          lumber contained in, or derived (by drying,
                          dressing, or working, or any combination of
                          these processes) from, a piece of rough green
                          lumber 1 inch in thickness, 12 inches in width,
                          and 1 foot in length, or the equivalent of such
                          piece in other dimensions.
                        *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
                Item                  Articles                           Rates of Duty
                                                                                1
                        Lumber, rough, dressed, or worked (including
                          softwood flooring classifiable as lumber, but
                          not including siding, molding, and hardwood
                          flooring):
                            Softwood:
                202.03          Spruce (Picea spp.)           35¢ per 1000 ft.,
                                                                         board measure
                

A single witness—presented by plaintiff —testified at trial. He was Robert St. Laurent, the secretary-treasurer and assistant general manager of the Luceville company—the manufacturer-exporter of the merchandise in question. The witness, the record showed, was familiar with the company's operations, its methods of production, and the merchandise described on the invoices as "horsefeathers." His testimony established the following. The first step in the production of horsefeathers is the sawing of spruce logs lengthwise into boards (or planks) of various thicknesses (e. g., 5/8 ", 7/8 ", 1", 1¼", 1¾", etc.), and crosscutting them into various lengths. A sample in evidence (plaintiff's exhibit 1) representing this stage of the process is a board that is almost 1" thick (and 3" wide); its longitudinal sawed surfaces are flat and approximately parallel.²

The boards (such as exhibit 1) are stored in the yard to dry and then resawn longitudinally through their centers to a thickness of about a half inch. A sample in evidence (plaintiff's exhibit 2) shows that this board—the product of this second step—also has approximately parallel flat longitudinal sawed surfaces.

The third and final stage in the production of horsefeathers consists of a further (or second) longitudinal or lengthwise resawing. At this stage, however, the device that feeds the boards into the saw is tilted so as to produce a beveled cut, i. e., a cut at an angle that divides each board into two wedge-shaped articles known as horsefeathers—samples of which are in evidence (plaintiff's exhibit 3). When a sample horsefeather is observed from either end, the cross section viewed is that of a right triangle. In other words the upper and lower surfaces are not parallel, there being instead a gradual tapering or tendency of the two surfaces to meet.

The record shows that horsefeathers are less advanced than (i) lumber which has been dressed or surfaced by planing; (ii) lumber which has been matched (i. e., provided with a tongued and grooved joint at the edge or ends); (iii) lumber that has been shiplapped (i. e., provided with a rabbeted or lapped joint at the edges); and (iv) lumber that has been patterned (i. e., shaped at the edges or on the faces to a patterned or molded form).

As to usage, horsefeathers are employed as a backing on the side or roof of a building in order to make the surfaces flat or level prior to the installation of resurfacing materials such as asphalt shingles or clapboard. When so used, the horsefeathers may require still further cutting to obtain the desired lengths. They do not require a finished surface because they are covered up in use.

In summary, the record establishes that to produce horsefeathers one starts by sawing a log (longitudinally) into boards or planks, which are then likewise center resawn (longitudinally); that the original boards, as well as the center resawn boards, have at least two approximately parallel longitudinal sawed surfaces; that the resawn boards are simply resawn again longitudinally at an angle or bevel to produce horsefeathers; and that the only other sawing required is the crosscutting of the boards to length. The record also establishes that the original sawed product and the resawn product (exhibits 1 and 2) cannot be used in the same manner as horsefeathers, which are the final beveled product, and that the beveling causes a change in use. Thus, the essential difference between the original sawed and resawn products (exhibits 1 and 2) and horsefeathers is that the horsefeathers have been resawn from the original piece of lumber and are made for a special purpose.

In this setting, plaintiff maintains that the imported horsefeathers fall squarely within the statutory definition of lumber set forth in schedule 2, part 1, subpart B, headnote 2, which (as we have seen) provides:

2. For the purposes of this part, the following terms have the meanings hereby assigned to them:

(a) Lumber: A product of a sawmill or sawmill and planing mill derived from a log by lengthwise sawing which, in its original sawed condition, has at least 2 approximately parallel flat longitudinal sawed surfaces, and which may be rough, dressed, or worked, as set forth below:

(i) rough lumber is lumber just as it comes from the saw, whether in the original sawed size or edged, resawn, crosscut, or trimmed to smaller sizes * *.

The above result is required, plaintiff adds, because the horsefeathers are the product of a sawmill; they are derived from a spruce log by lengthwise sawing; in their original sawed condition they have at least two approximately parallel flat longitudinal sawed surfaces; and they are "rough lumber" as defined above in that they have not been altered except to be resawn and crosscut to smaller sizes as permitted by the statutory definition. Defendant's argument, on the other hand, is that the statutory definition of lumber is not all-inclusive; that generally if a new and different product emerges which has a different name, character or use from its predecessor, it is a manufacture;³ that the line must be drawn somewhere, and the general concept of a change in name, character or use should be the accepted criterion here; and that on this basis horsefeathers are a manufacture of lumber and thus are more than mere lumber since they have a different name, character and use from their predecessor—rough lumber.

For the reasons that follow, we conclude that the horsefeathers involved in this case are lumber as claimed by plaintiff, and that defendant's argument is without merit. We note at the outset that the tariff schedules here in question do not make a distinction...