RBW, INC. v. United States

Decision Date13 January 1986
Docket NumberNo. 82-6-00825.,82-6-00825.
Citation632 F. Supp. 13
PartiesRBW, INC., Per C.J. Tower & Sons of Buffalo, Inc., Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant.
CourtU.S. Court of International Trade

Mandel & Grunfeld (Steven P. Florsheim, New York City, on motion), for plaintiff.

Richard K. Willard, Asst. Atty. Gen., Washington, D.C., Joseph I. Liebman, Atty. in Charge, Intern. Trade Field Office, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civ. Div., New York City, (Barbara Epstein, Washington, D.C., on motion), for defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

CARMAN, Judge:

This case, presented by the parties on stipulated facts in lieu of trial, involves the proper tariff classification of books of crossword puzzles, word games, and "search-a-word" puzzles. The United States Customs Service (Customs) classified the merchandise as puzzles under item 735.20 of the Tariff Schedules of the United States (TSUS), which reads:

Puzzles; game, sport, gymnastic, athletic, or playground equipment; all the foregoing, and parts thereof, not specially provided for.

Plaintiff claims, however, that the merchandise is properly classified under item 270.25 as "books not specially provided for," which are duty-free. In the alternative, plaintiff seeks classification of its merchandise as "toy books" under item 737.52, also duty-free.

Stipulated Facts

The imported merchandise consists of a collection of puzzle sheets bound as books in paperback covers. The sheets include textual and pictorial matter. Some of the books, "Puzzlers Crosswords No. 1" through "Puzzlers Crosswords No. 12" contain rear pages with promotional text on both sides, and the "Treasury of Puzzles" also has a table of contents page. All of the imported articles have a front and rear cover and an inside title page with copyright text on the reverse side.

Plaintiff, a printing company, printed and bound the puzzles. Plaintiff then sold the books to publishers in the United States, who in turn sold the books to book distributors, other publishers, or directly to mass-market retailers such as K-Mart and Zayre department stores. At the retail level, the merchandise is sold in book stores, drug and notion stores and general department stores. In those bookstores that display books by category, merchandise similar or identical to the subject merchandise is generally displayed in the "puzzle" section.

Defendant conceded in its answer that the merchandise does fit the description of books for tariff classification purposes, and that books are provided for under item 270.25, TSUS. Defendant has further conceded in the stipulated facts that one of the books subject of this action, which is entitled "The Super Activity, Puzzle and Game Book," is properly classified as a book under item 270.25 because it contains mostly pages of other activities with only some pages of puzzles.

Opinion

Defendant makes two arguments supporting Customs' classification of the merchandise as puzzles under item 735.20, TSUS. First, argues defendant, although the merchandise is described by the tariff provisions for both books and puzzles, the provision for puzzles more specifically describes the merchandise. Defendant alternatively contends that even if the merchandise is equally described by both provisions, item 735.20 for puzzles is still the proper classification because it calls for the highest original duty rate. Both of these contentions depend upon the premise that the merchandise qualifies as puzzles within the meaning of item 735.20. The Court finds, however, that the merchandise does not consist of puzzles for tariff classification purposes and is therefore properly classified under plaintiff's claimed classification of item 270.25 for books.

Plaintiff poses as its primary support for the conclusion that the imported merchandise does not fall within the ambit of item 735.20 the doctrine of noscitur a sociis. Meaning that "it is known from its associates," the doctrine is a tool for statutory construction that provides for deriving the meaning of a term from the meaning of other words with which the questioned term is associated. Nightwriter Corp. v. United States, 69 Cust.Ct. 191, 196-97, C.D. 4393 (1972). As item 735.20 provides for the classification not only of puzzles, but also for game, sport, gymnastic, athletic, or playground equipment, plaintiff argues that the requirement of manipulation associated with these enumerated items also applies to "puzzles." Essentially, continues plaintiff, item 735.20 puzzles include articles such as "jig-saw puzzles, `teasers' such as bent pieces of plastic or wood objects requiring assembly, or disassembly or reformation." Plaintiff's Brief at 8.

Defendant contends that the doctrine of noscitur a sociis may not be utilized in interpreting the eo nomine term "puzzles" because, like other rules of construction, noscitur a sociis is only applicable when the language of a statute is ambiguous. Defendant asserts that item 735.20 clearly and unambiguously provides for puzzles, without limitation to any particular type of puzzles. Defendant cites a dictionary definition of "puzzle," contends that crossword puzzles fall within this definition, and apparently believes that the dictionary definition is the common meaning of the term as was intended by Congress in the tariff designation for puzzles.

Defendant cites Funk and Wagnall's New Standard Dictionary of the English Language (1956) for the definition of puzzle as

1. a thing difficult to understand or solve; a thing or problem that perplexes; especially something purposely arranged so as to require time, patience and ingenuity to arrive at the solution of its intricacies; a problem, riddle....

The Court has additionally consulted Webster's New International Dictionary (2d ed. 1958), which offers the following definition:

2. Something which perplexes or embarrasses; a difficult problem or question; an enigma; hence, a toy, contrivance, question, or problem designed for testing ingenuity; as, a crossword puzzle.

Given the breadth of the definitions, as well as their abstract nature, the Court finds that the term puzzle as used in the context of tariff classification is ambiguous and that the Court may consider aids in construing the statute and disclosing legislative intent.

To begin, item 735.20 is a basket provision covering "all games and puzzles, including toy games and puzzles, and all sport, gymnastic, athletic, and playground equipment ... not specially provided for elsewhere in the schedules." Tariff Classification Study, Schedule 7 287 (1960). The original language proposed called for the classification of "games and puzzles, including toy games and puzzles; sport, gymnastics, or athletic equipment n.s.p.f. not specially provided for," id. at 884, but was changed to clarify "that the item was intended to cover under the term `games' all game equipment and parts of such equipment not specially provided for ... and under the term `gymnastic equipment' all playground equipment, not specially provided for, such as swings, see-saws, and slides." Id. at 287. Item 735.20 brought together articles which prior to the TSUS had been scattered throughout the tariff act and were often classified according to their material composition of chief value. E.g., Tariff Act of 1930, par. 397 (articles composed of various metals), par. 409 (articles of rattan, bamboo, osier or willow), par. 412 (manufactures of wood or bark), par. 1539(b) (manufactures of which synthetic resin is the chief binding agent). The Court has not been directed to any evidence showing the scope of the term "puzzles," but is persuaded that item 735.20 does generally cover manipulable articles and larger pieces of equipment made out of various materials. There...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Celestaire, Inc. v. US
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of International Trade
    • May 24, 1996
    ...is ambiguous the Court may utilize navigational aids in construing the statute and disclosing legislative intent. RBW, Inc. v. United States, 10 CIT 21, 632 F.Supp. 13 (1986), aff'd, 5 Fed.Cir. (T) 51, 806 F.2d 249 (Fed.Cir.1986). Such aids include standard canons of statutory construction,......
  • Tolbard v. Bechtel Corp.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Maryland
    • April 17, 1986
    ... ... TOLBARD ... BECHTEL CORP., et al ... Civ. No. Y-85-1055 ... United States District Court, D. Maryland ... April 17, ... Allied Contractors, Inc., 275 Md. 151, 157, 338 A.2d 275, cert. denied, 423 U.S. 1017, 96 S.Ct ... ...
  • RBW, Inc. v. U.S., 86-1033
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Federal Circuit
    • December 5, 1986
    ...under item 270.25, TSUS [books not specially provided for]." On the basis of the opinion of the trial court, RBW, Inc. v. United States, 632 F.Supp. 13 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1986), the judgment below is AFFIRMED. ...

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