Henry A. Wess, Inc. v. United States, C.D. 4361

• Decision Date: 27 June 1972
• Docket Number: C.D. 4361
• Citation: 68 Cust. Ct. 201
• Parties: HENRY A. WESS, INC. <I>v.</I> UNITED STATES.
• Court: U.S. Court of Customs and Patent Appeals (CCPA)

68 Cust. Ct. 201

HENRY A. WESS, INC.

v. UNITED STATES.

C.D. 4361

United States Customs Court, Second Division.

Decided on rehearing [C.D. 3851] June 27, 1972.

Allerton deC. Tompkins for the plaintiff.

Harlington Wood, Jr., Acting Assistant Attorney General (Charles P. Deem and Steven R. Sosnov, trial attorneys), for the defendant.

Before RAO, FORD, and NEWMAN, Judges

FORD, Judge:

This matter was originally decided in Harry A. Wess, Inc. v. United States, 62 Cust. Ct. 705, C.D. 3851 (1969), wherein the protests were overruled as to 10 items of merchandise and the case restored to the calendar of this court "for the sole purpose of clarifying the source of the facts and figures contained in the manufacturer's responses to written interrogatories." Pursuant to this judgment the court on motion issued a commission to take depositions. A completed deposition was thereafter received in evidence.

In our original opinion, we stated:

Although we would be justified in dismissing these protests at this time, we believe that the interests of justice would best be served by a clarification of the source of deponent's information which, if it proves sound, will permit full consideration of the component of chief value and a disposition on the merits.

The clarification referred to, supra, was due to the use of the terms "cooperators" and "notations" in the original deposition of the manufacturer with respect to the cost figures. The parties at the original hearing agreed that the term "cooperators" referred to employees but there was no understanding as to what the term "notations" meant. The present deposition makes it adequately clear that the term "notations" referred to index cards made out for each article produced which contain the cost figures. The person who made these notations was a Mrs. Nives Casoni Martelli who has been employed by deponent in the Production and Costs Department since 1955. The deponent who is co-owner of the firm, stated that he has direct control and supervision over these records which are presently being made in the same manner. These are prepared in order to establish the cost of the articles and to have a ready supply of raw materials. Such records are in the possession of the company and are open to public inspection.

Based upon this deposition, plaintiff contends the court now has sufficient information to make its determination of the following articles as set forth in our original decision:

                Protest 61/8781 — Invoice No. 481
                                   Invoice
                    Article No.   Item No.           Invoice Description
                         1         1480           Displays for 1 gent's ring
                         2         1480           Displays for 1 lady's ring
                         3         1480           Displays for 2 lady's rings
                    Protest 63/17417 — Invoice No. 294
                                   Invoice
                    Article No.   Item No.           Invoice Description
                        13         9956/A   Large ring boxes with slot 58 × 50
                        14         13146    Tie-tack boxes
                        15          9958    Bracelet boxes 250 × 60
                        16          9955    Large ring boxes with tongue 53 × 59
                                                 mod. 7
                        17          9960    Brooch boxes
                        18          9957    Bracelet boxes 230 × 50 mod. 7
                        20          9959    Cuff link boxes 100 × 80 mod. 7
                        21          6370    Pendant boxes
                        22          9963    Watch boxes with collar
                        23          9961    Pendant boxes
                        24          6370    Pendant boxes
                        25          2998    Utility boxes
                    Protest 61/22459 — Invoice No. 163
                                  Invoice
                    Article No.  Item No.            Invoice Description
                        26        80131/E   Ladies watch box "Long Baguette"
                        27        80132/E   Long gents watch box 250 × 58 mm
                        28        8041/E    Brooch boxes 100 × 80 mm
                        29        8071/E    Pendant boxes 10 × 8 cm
                        30        8084/E    Pearl necklace boxes 210 × 120 mm
                        31            /E    Brooch boxes 115 × 90 mm
                        32        8011/E    Ring boxes with tongue
                        33        80113/E   Ladies watch boxes with collar
                        34        8058/E    Cuff link boxes and earring boxes
                        35        1000/E    Ring boxes with slot
                        36            /E    Utility boxes 220 × 140 mm
                

The original deposition establishes that articles numbered 1, 2, 3, 16, 18, 26, 32, and 33, supra, are in chief value of plastic; and articles 13 14, 15, 17, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 34, 35, and 36 are in chief value of wood. United States v. H. A. Caesar & Co., 32 CCPA 142, C.A.D. 299 (1945); United States v. Rice-Stix Dry Goods Co., 19 CCPA 232, T.D. 45337 (1931).

Defendant contends the original deposition is inadmissible since the records themselves should have been...