LeMans Corp. v. U.S.

• Decision Date: 08 February 2010
• Docket Number: Slip Op. 10-14.,Court No. 06-00038.
• Citation: 675 F.Supp.2d 1374
• Parties: LeMANS CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant.
• Court: U.S. Court of International Trade

675 F.Supp.2d 1374

LeMANS CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant.

Slip Op. 10-14.

Court No. 06-00038.

United States Court of International Trade.

February 8, 2010.

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

Rodriguez, O'Donnell, Gonzalez & Williams, P.C. (Thomas J. O'Donnell, Jessica R. Rifkin, and Lara A. Austrins), for Plaintiff LeMans Corporation.

Tony West, Assistant Attorney General; Barbara S. Williams, Attorney in Charge, International Trade Field Office, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, U.S. Department of Justice (Alexander Vanderweide); and Office of Assistant Chief Counsel, International Trade Litigation, U.S. Customs & Border Protection (Michael W. Heydrich), of counsel, for Defendant United States.

Before: Judge Judith M. Barzilay.

OPINION

BARZILAY, Judge:

This case concerns the U.S. Customs & Border Protection's ("Customs") classification of certain motocross jerseys, motocross pants, and motorcycle jackets under Chapters 61 and 62 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States ("HTSUS"). Defendant United States moves the court for summary judgment, arguing that Customs classified the subject merchandise under the appropriate provisions of the HTSUS. Plaintiff LeMans Corporation ("LeMans" or "Plaintiff") contests the classification and cross-moves the court for summary judgment, alleging that subheadings within Chapter 95 of the HTSUS covering sports equipment most accurately describe the subject jerseys, pants, and jackets. In view of the applicable General Rules of Interpretation ("GRIs") and for the reasons explained below, the court grants Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment and denies Plaintiff's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment.

I. Background

A. The Subject Merchandise

LeMans imported the subject merchandise into the United States through the ports of Chicago and Los Angeles between July 20, 2004 and September 17, 2004.¹ Summons 3-4. The merchandise consists of "highly specialized" jerseys, pants, and jackets "designed, engineered, and produced exclusively for use while participating in motocross activities and other power sports riding." Pl.'s Resp. to Def.'s First Interrogs. & Reqs. for Produc., Def. Mot. for Summ. J. Ex. C at 5 ("Pl. Resp. to Def. First Interrogs."). The dual purposes of the goods "prevent injury to the rider from abrasion and impacts with motorcycle parts and the surrounding elements, as well as . . . provide optimal fit and comfort while participating in the sport." Pl. Resp. to Def. First Interrogs. 5.

Synthetic, abrasion-resistant mesh and ventilated knit patterned fabric, which also wicks away moisture, makes up the five motocross jerseys at issue.² Pl. Resp. to Def. First Interrogs. 6. "The jerseys have padded elbows for abrasion and impact protection" and "form an integrated protection system" with the use of "a tacky silicon print on the lower back to keep the jersey tucked into the motocross pant when riding." Pl. Resp. to Def. First Interrogs. 6. An oversized, multi-panel cut allows for a non-binding fit so that other safety equipment, which if permanently affixed in the good would result in improper fit and inadequate safety,³ may be worn under the jersey. Pl. Resp. to Def. First Interrogs. 6.

Six different models comprise the subject pants,⁴ and riders generally use the goods off-road on motocross tracks, supercross tracks, or on other off-road courses. Dep. of Jeffrey T. Hart, Def. Mot. for Summ. J. Ex. B at 12:12-16 ("Hart Dep."). Heavy-duty nylon provides riders with impact and abrasion protection, and the pants contain additional comfort features, such as "mesh panels for venting, heat resistant inner leg areas (made of leather or man[-]made fibers) to prevent burns from the engine and exhaust pipe, and spandex and stretch panels to allow freedom of movement and a non[-]binding fit in the legs, seat, and crotch area." Pl. Resp. to Def. First Interrogs. 5. To ensure freedom of movement, the pants also include [[ ]] hip padding instead of alternative rigid protective elements.⁵ Pl. Resp. to Def. First Interrogs. 5.

Finally, the LeMans motorcycle jackets at issue are the Super Duty, Merc, Tarmac, and the Airtex Sport.⁶ Compl. ¶ 9. Heavy-duty materials provide protection to the rider on the public street from impact and abrasion injuries "which may result from a crash or fall, including the initial impact and the sliding contact with the pavement." Pl. Resp. to Def. First Interrogs. 6. Internal armor pads, constructed of [[special material]], appear in the shoulders and elbows, "the highest impact areas in the event of crashes or falls." Pl. Resp. to Def. First Interrogs. 6. The jackets also feature a[[ ]] back pad for added protection. Pl. Resp. to Def. First Interrogs. 6. LeMans designed the jackets to fit closely to the rider's body and tapered the sleeves snugly around the wrist "to keep the jacket in proper position while riding or during a crash." Pl. Resp. to Def. First Interrogs. 6. The jackets also accommodate a rider's posture with a cut that has longer sleeves and fuller shoulders, with zippered vents or mesh providing "airflow into the jacket for various riding conditions." Pl. Resp. to Def. First Interrogs. 6-7.

In summary, all the subject merchandise are readily recognizable as articles of clothing albeit with certain specialized protective features, some minimal, some more significant.

B. The Subject Classification

Customs classified the subject merchandise under five subheadings within Chapters 61 and 62 of the HTSUS.⁷ The agency entered the relevant motocross jerseys as "Sweaters, pullovers, sweatshirts, waistcoats (vests) and similar articles, knitted or crocheted: Of man-made fibers: Other" under subheading 6110.30.30 of the HTSUS at a duty rate of 32% ad valorem. Compl. ¶¶ 13, 20. Customs classified the subject motocross pants as "Garments, made up of fabrics of heading 5602, 5603, 5903, 5906 or 5907: Other men's or boy's garments: Of manmade fibers: Other" under subheading 6210.40.50 of the HTSUS at a duty rate of 7.1% ad valorem.⁸ Compl. ¶¶ 11, 19. Finally, Customs found that the various motorcycle jackets fit within three separate provisions of Heading 6201, HTSUS, and classified and liquidated the Airtex Sport and Merc models under subheading 6201.93.30 at a duty rate of 7.1% ad valorem, the Tarmac jacket under 6201.93.35 at a rate of 27.7% ad valorem, and the Super Duty model under 6201.92.15 at a rate of 6.2% ad valorem.⁹ Compl. ¶¶ 14-15, 21; Answer ¶ 15.

II. Subject Matter Jurisdiction & Standard of Review

The Court has exclusive jurisdiction over all civil actions commenced under 19 U.S.C. § 1515 that contest Customs's denial of a protest. 28 U.S.C. § 1581(a). An action before the court warrants summary judgment "if the pleadings, discovery and disclosure materials on file, and any affidavits show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." USCIT R. 56(c); see also Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322, 106 S.Ct. 2548, 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986). A genuine issue of material fact exists only when the court could resolve a factual element under the applicable law in favor of either party. See Marriott Int'l Resorts, L.P. v. United States, 586 F.3d 962, 968 (Fed.Cir.2009) (citing Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 247-49, 106 S.Ct. 2505, 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986)). If no dispute over a material fact would impact the outcome of the suit and the action focuses solely on the proper classification of the merchandise, as in this case, the court may grant summary judgment. See Bausch & Lomb, Inc. v. United States, 148 F.3d 1363, 1365 (Fed.Cir.1998).

The court applies a two-step analysis when determining whether Customs properly classified the imported merchandise. Pillowtex Corp. v. United States, 171 F.3d 1370, 1373 (Fed.Cir.1999) (citing Bausch & Lomb, Inc., 148 F.3d at 1365). The court first must ascertain the meaning of the terms within the relevant tariff provision and subsequently determine whether the subject merchandise fits within those terms. Id. The first step presents a question of law, Franklin v. United States, 289 F.3d 753, 757 (Fed.Cir.2002), while the second concerns issues of fact. Pillowtex Corp., 171 F.3d at 1373. Normally, the factual component of the Customs classification garners a presumption of correctness. 28 U.S.C. § 2639(a)(1). However, that presumption does not apply to Customs's decision when no factual disputes surround the subject merchandise. Intercontinental Marble Corp. v. United States, 27 CIT 654, 655 n. 3, 264 F.Supp.2d 1306, 1309 n. 3 (2003), aff'd, 381 F.3d 1169 (Fed.Cir.2004).

III. Discussion

A. The General Rules of Interpretation

The GRIs govern the classification of goods under the HTSUS. Boen Hardwood Flooring, Inc. v. United States, 357 F.3d 1262, 1264 (Fed.Cir.2004). The court applies the GRIs in numerical order and once a particular rule provides proper classification, the court may not consider any subsequent GRI. See Mita Copystar Am. v. United States, 160 F.3d 710, 712 (Fed.Cir.1998). The products in this case are subject to classification pursuant to the first rule, GRI 1, which holds that "classification shall be determined according to the terms of the headings and any relative section or chapter notes." GRI 1; see also Orlando Food Corp. v. United States, 140 F.3d 1437, 1440 (Fed.Cir.1998). Absent contrary legislative intent, the court must construe HTSUS terms "according to their common and commercial meanings." Carl Zeiss, Inc. v. United States, 195 F.3d 1375, 1379 (Fed.Cir.1999) (citation omitted). The Explanatory Notes ("EN") that accompany each Chapter of the HTSUS provide persuasive assistance to the court in ascertaining the correct classification of the merchandise, though the explanations do not constitute legally binding authority. See Lonza, Inc. v. United States, 46 F.3d 1098, 1109 (Fed.Cir.1995). Once it determines that the particular heading...