American Honda Motor Co. v. United States

68 Cust. Ct. 138, 1972 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 2539
CourtUnited States Customs Court
DecidedApril 6, 1972
DocketC.D. 4350
StatusPublished

This text of 68 Cust. Ct. 138 (American Honda Motor Co. v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Customs Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
American Honda Motor Co. v. United States, 68 Cust. Ct. 138, 1972 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 2539 (cusc 1972).

Opinion

EichaRdsoN, Judge:

Base metal articles consisting, among other things, of drive chain cases, exhaust pipe protectors and covers, stands (side and center), and handlebar-speedometer holders used on Honda motorcycles, were exported from Japan and classified in liquidation upon entry at the port of Los Angeles, Calif, under TSUS item 692.55 at the duty rate of 12 per centum ad valorem as parts of motorcycles. It is claimed in the protests that these articles are properly dutiable at 8.5 per centum ad valorem under item 647.01 as hinges, fittings, and mountings designed for motor vehicles.

The competing tariff provisions read:

[classified under]
Motorcycles and parts thereof:
% sfc % H* H* ❖ ❖
692.55 Parts_ 12% ad val.
[claimed under]
Hinges; and fittings and mountings not specially provided for, suitable for furniture, doors, windows, blinds, staircases, 'luggage, vehicle coach work, caskets, cabinets, and similar uses; all the foregoing of base metal, whether or not coated or plated with precious metal:
Not coated or plated with precious metal:
Of iron or steel, of aluminum, or of zinc:
647.01 Hinges, fittings, and mountings,
designed for motor vehicles_ 8.5% ad val.

At the trial plaintiffs’ counsel conceded that the articles in question are motorcycle parts, but took the position that these articles are especially provided for as hinges, fittings or mountings designed for motor vehicles, and are, therefore, properly dutiable under item 647.01 of the tariff schedules in accordance with General Headnote 10 (i;j) which provides that a provision for “parts” of an article covers a product solely or chiefly used as a part of such article, but does not prevail [140]*140over a specific provision, for such. part. Three witnesses from various segments of the motorcycle industry called on plaintiffs’ behalf testified that the subject articles fit within their understanding of the lexicographical meanings of the terms “hinges”, “fittings”, and “mountings”. In the main these witnesses grouped the stands, cases, protectors, and covers as “fittings” and the holders as “mountings”. But one of these witnesses regarded the cases as “mountings” and the stands as “hinges”. And still another of them considered the holders to be “fittings”. A fourth witness from the industry, called on behalf of the defendant, did not regard any of the subject articles to be “hinges”, “fittings”, or “mountings”, in the trade, but admitted that they came within the ambit of the definitions propounded by plaintiffs’ counsel.

The testimony of witnesses relative to the common meaning of tariff terms is advisory only, and has no binding effect upon the court which is privileged to be guided by its own understanding of such terms aided or unaided by other authorities. United States v. John B. Stetson Go., 21 CCPA 3, 9, T.D. 46319 (1933). Lexicographical authorities called to our attention by the plaintiffs disclose the following definitions:

hinge, 1. The hook with its eye, or the joint, or flexible piece, on which a door, gate, lid, etc. turns or swings.
(Webster’s New International Dictionary, Second Edition, Unabridged, 1935)
hinge la. A jointed or flexible device on which a door, lid, or other swinging part turns comprising typically a pair of metal leaves joined through the knuckles by a pin. b: A flexible ligamen-tous joint * * *
(Webster’s Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged, 1963)
-fitting, * * * 2. Anything used in fitting up; esp. pi., necessary fixtures or apparatus; auxiliary parts, as of a boiler, or the small parts of a machine; * * *
(Webster’s New International Dictionary, Second Edition, Unabridged, 1935)
fitting n la: something used in fitting up: accessory, adjukct, ATTACHMENT * * * b: a small often standardized part (as a coupling, value, gauge) entering into the construction of * * * other apparatus — usu. used in pi.; * * *
(Webster’s Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged, 1963)
mownting, n. * * * 2. That which serves as a mount or by which anything is prepared or equipped for use, or set off to advantage; equipment; embellishment; setting; * * * b The standard or support; as, an equatorial mounting.
(Webster’s New International Dictionary, Second Edition, Unabridged, 1935)
[141]*141moimtmg n * * * 2: frame, support, embellishmeNts as a: A jewelry setting * * * b: a 'handle, mount, or coupling for a mechanical device.
(¡Webster’s Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged, 1963)

The testimony at bar indicates that the subject articles, with the exception of the handlebar-speedometer holders, have end use functions on the motorcycles on which they are installed. Thus, the protectors and covers insulate the operator from the heat of engine exhaust gases, the cases shield the operator from oil flung from the drive chain when the vehicle is being driven, and the stands hold the vehicles in an upright position when they are parked or stored. And it is this characteristic of end use function which, in our opinion, excludes these articles from the purview of the above definitions. For the common denominator of all the definitions noted above is that they define articles which possess only auxiliary uses and functions — the antithesis of what the evidence reveals in this case with respect to the protectors, covers, cases and stands. The handlebar-speedometer holders, however, do possess the auxiliary function characteristic of a “mounting” as defined above in that they are installed and function as a means of support for the steering apparatus, namely, the handlebar, and as support for the speedometer.

But, even if all of the subject articles could be said to come within the lexicographical meaning of the terms “hinges”, “fittings”, and “mountings”, we are of the opinion that they are not such as is contemplated by item 647.01. In Schwarz v. United States, 57 CCPA 19, C.A.D. 971 (1969), involving ski carriers and luggage racks classified under TSUS item 657.20 as articles of iron or steel and claimed to be classifiable under TSUS item 647.01 as fittings and mountings designed for motor vehicles, our appeals court, after reviewing the legislative history of item 647.01, among other things, stated with respect to this history:

. . . the reference to paragraph 369(c) of the 1930 act, which specifically covered only “parts” of motor vehicle bodies, make[s] it clear that the class of merchandise intended to be covered by the new item 647.01 encompasses only such articles as go into and become a part of a motor vehicle coach.

And the appeals court went on in Schwarz to conclude, among other things, that the ski carriers and luggage racks were not' automobile todies

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
68 Cust. Ct. 138, 1972 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 2539, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/american-honda-motor-co-v-united-states-cusc-1972.