Zunold Trading Corporation v. United States

• Decision Date: 06 February 1968
• Docket Number: C.D. 3279
• Citation: 60 Cust. Ct. 112
• Parties: ZUNOLD TRADING CORPORATION <I>v.</I> UNITED STATES. LEADING FORWARDERS, INC. <I>v.</I> UNITED STATES.
• Court: U.S. Court of Customs and Patent Appeals (CCPA)

60 Cust. Ct. 112

ZUNOLD TRADING CORPORATION

v. UNITED STATES.

LEADING FORWARDERS, INC. v. UNITED STATES.

C.D. 3279

United States Customs Court, First Division.

Decided February 6, 1968.

Sharretts, Paley, Carter & Blauvelt (M. Barry Levy and Eugene F. Blauvelt of counsel) for the plaintiffs.

Edwin L. Weisl, Jr., Assistant Attorney General (Arthur E. Schwimmer and Mollie Strum, trial attorneys), for the defendant. Before WATSON and BECKWORTH, Judges

WATSON, Judge:

This is one of two cases presently pending before the court involving the identical issue. The other case is Armbee Corporation and W. J. Byrnes & Co., Inc. v. United States, 60 Cust. Ct. 105, C.D. 3278, decided concurrently with the present case. The question for determination is whether certain artificial flowers and foliage which were classified at the rate of 28 per centum ad valorem under item 748.20 of the Tariff Schedules of the United States as artificial flowers, wholly or almost wholly of plastics, are excluded from classification under said item by virtue of the provisions of headnote 1 (iii) of schedule 7, part 7, subpart B of the Tariff Schedules of the United States.

Headnote 1 (iii) of schedule 7, part 7, subpart B of the Tariff Schedules of the United States provides that the provisions of item 748.20 of said schedules do not include "articles consisting of parts assembled otherwise than by binding with flexible materials such as wire, paper, textile material, or foil, or by gluing, or by similar methods". As disclosed by the record in this case, the involved merchandise is made in the following manner:

A. The process of manufacturing the plastic flowers is one of what is know [sic] is injection molding. The material used is polyethylene, and the method is one of first molding the various petals and stems that are required in order to have the finished product, and the method of assembly is one of snapping or slipping on the various petals required to recreate the finished product. [R. 21.]

Plaintiffs claim the involved merchandise properly dutiable at the rate of 17 per centum ad valorem under item 774.60 of the Tariff Schedules of the United States as "other" articles, not specially provided for, of rubber or plastics.

Plaintiffs' witness, Mr. Isidore Abrams, who stated that he has been familiar with the type of flowers represented by plaintiffs' exhibit 1 since about 1955, explained that each leaf has at its base a socket which fits over a ball on the stem (R. 23); that, in addition to a main stem, the various petals or leaves therein are also...