Pollard Bearings Corporation v. United States

Decision Date27 February 1975
Docket NumberCustoms Appeal No. 74-13.
Citation511 F.2d 568
CourtU.S. Court of Customs and Patent Appeals (CCPA)
PartiesPOLLARD BEARINGS CORPORATION, Appellant, v. The UNITED STATES, Appellee.

Joseph F. Donohue and John P. Donohue, Donohue & Shaw, New York City, attorneys of record, for appellant.

Carla A. Hills, Asst. Atty. Gen., Andrew P. Vance, Chief, Customs Section, Robert B. Silverman, New York City, for the United States.

Before MARKEY, Chief Judge, and RICH, BALDWIN, LANE and MILLER, Judges.

BALDWIN, Judge.

This is an appeal from the judgment of the United States Customs Court, 71 Cust.Ct. ___, C.D. 4461, 363 F.Supp. 1191 (1973), overruling appellant's claim for classification and holding that the imported merchandise had been properly classified by the collector of customs. We reverse and remand.

The merchandise, invoiced as "Fan & Pump Shaft Bearing Assemblies—Auto Parts," was classified under item 660.90, Tariff Schedules of the United States (TSUS), as parts of pumps for liquids and assessed with duty at the rate of 12 per centum ad valorem. These fan and pump shaft bearing assemblies (FPS bearings) are also known in the trade as integral shaft bearings.

Appellant claims that the imported merchandise is properly classifiable under either item 660.52 TSUS as parts of piston-type engines at 8.5 per centum ad valorem or item 692.25 TSUS as parts of motor vehicles at 8.5 per centum ad valorem.

Appellee, in its answer to appellant's complaint, asserted an alternative claim that, if the merchandise was not properly classifiable under item 660.90 TSUS, classification would be proper under item 680.35 TSUS as ball or roller bearings at 3.4 cents per pound plus 15 per centum ad valorem. Appellee stated that the merchandise is more specifically described in item 680.35 TSUS than in items 660.52 or 692.25 TSUS.

The statutes involved are:

                Classified under
                  660.90 Pumps for liquids, whether or not
                           fitted with measuring devices
                           liquid elevators of bucket, chain
                           screw, band, and similar types
                           all the foregoing whether operated
                           by hand or by any kind of power
                           unit, and parts thereof .... 12% ad val
                  Claimed under by appellant:
                  660.52 Parts of piston-type engines other
                          than compression-ignition
                          engines ....................  8.5% ad val.
                  or
                  Chassis, bodies (including cabs), and parts
                    of * * * motor vehicles:
                     *      *      *      *      *      *
                  692.25 Other ......................   8.5% ad val.
                  Appellee's alternative claim:
                  680.35 Ball or roller bearings, and parts
                           thereof ...................  3.4¢ per lb.+
                                                       15% ad val.
                

The court summarized the physical and testimonial evidence of record as follows:

The imported steel shaft bearings (exhibit 2), . . . which have a steel shaft approximately six inches long, are provided with a steel bearing collar upon which the shaft serves as an axis in spinning. Exhibit 3 is an article known in the motor trade as a water pump illustrating "quite clearly the manner in which the imported bearings are installed in the water pump as it is sold to the automotive trade". . . . The main visible components of exhibit 3 are: (1) a cast-iron housing with a neck of sorts and finger-like extensions for hose attachments and holes for bolting it to the engine block; (2) the shaft bearing which is pressed or inserted into the neck of the housing so that it is completely enclosed by the housing except at one end; (3) a circular disk called an impeller that is pressed on the shaft at the end which faces on the engine block; (4) a so-called fan hub with four holes that is pressed on the shaft end that protrudes from the neck of the housing. Exhibit 3, in the condition assembled, is sold to the automobile trade as a water pump ready to be attached to the engine block.
Exhibit 4 is a mock-up of the front end of a motor vehicle illustrating the manner in which a pulley with four holes (exhibit 5) is fitted on the fan hub that is pressed on the imported shaft; a fan with a neck and hub with four holes, all one piece, is positioned on the short end of the shaft that protrudes through the pulley so that it is properly aligned with the pulley in a fashion that the fan and pulley can be and are bolted through the four holes to the fan hub. The mock-up also illustrates additional pulley attachments to the crank-shaft, air conditioner, air injection pump, generator, and power steering components of a motor vehicle. There are belts passing around the fan hub pulley (four belts on the illustrative exhibit) to the various other pulley connections; working off power that comes from the crank-shaft.5 The pulley belts transmit the
5 Exhibit 7 is an engine belt and pulley chart showing the manner in which the various pulley and belt attachments can be arranged should a purchaser of a motor vehicle opt for one or more of the components requiring a pulley attachment. The generator, water pump and crankshaft pulleys are basic in all motor vehicles that have water-cooled engines.
Exhibit 8 is a sample of a shaft bearing used to support the fan in a motor vehicle with an air-cooled engine.
power necessary to operate the various components including the imported integral pump shaft bearing which, as it spins, operates the water impeller and the fan.
Plaintiff's witnesses testified that the bearing incorporated in the pump is rotated by the belts that pass from the crank-shaft pulley to the pulley mounted on the fan hub of the bearing. In rotating, the bearing transmits power to the water pump impeller and also drives the fan. The bearing additionally takes the load created by the power that is transmitted to other components of a motor vehicle such as an air conditioner, air injection pump, generator, and power steering. Plaintiff's witnesses expressed the opinion that all those functions are co-equal in a motor vehicle in which those auxiliary components are present.
Failures associated with integral shaft bearings, in the experience of the witnesses for both sides, involved the shaft being broken at the load-bearing fan hub and under stress of supporting the fan and taking the radial load arising from the various belt drives. To forestall such failures the shaft of the imported integral shaft bearings were designed and strengthened to
...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Solder Removal Co. v. US INTERN. TRADE
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Customs and Patent Appeals (CCPA)
    • August 24, 1978
    ...evidence, and we will not do so when they are clearly contrary to the weight of the evidence." Accord, Pollard Bearings Corp. v. United States, 511 F.2d 568, 571, 62 CCPA 61, 64, C.A.D. 1146 (1975); Northam Warren Corp. v. United States, 475 F.2d 647, 649, 60 CCPA 117, 119, C.A.D. 1092 (197......
  • Sanyo Elec. Inc. v. United States, C.D. 4855
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Customs and Patent Appeals (CCPA)
    • May 12, 1980
    ...to be properly classifiable as parts of bicycles. Other cases which illustrate the "more than" doctrine are Pollard Bearings Corporation v. United States, 511 F.2d 568, 62 CCPA 61, C.A.D. 1146 (1975) (fan and pump shaft bearings "more than" parts for water pumps); Montgomery Ward & Co. v. U......
  • Omark Industries, Inc. v. US
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of International Trade
    • August 31, 1988
    ...is co-equal to that of the clutch. To show the importance of the supporting function of the hub, Omark relies on Pollard Bearings Corp. v. United States, 62 CCPA 61, 63, C.A.D. 1146, 511 F.2d 568, 570 (1975), which found that an integral shaft bearing used in certain automobiles had a six i......
  • AMICO, INC. v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Customs and Patent Appeals (CCPA)
    • December 9, 1977
    ...schedules, it is not classifiable under the provision applicable to the latter article. See, e. g., Pollard Bearings Corporation v. United States, 511 F.2d 568, 62 CCPA 61, C.A.D. 1146 (1975); United States v. Acec Electric Corp., 474 F.2d 1009, 60 CCPA 113, C.A.D. 1091 (1973); United State......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT