Fibre Making Processes, Inc. v. United States

8 Cust. Ct. 296, 1942 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 49
CourtUnited States Customs Court
DecidedApril 29, 1942
DocketC. D. 624
StatusPublished

This text of 8 Cust. Ct. 296 (Fibre Making Processes, Inc. 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
Fibre Making Processes, Inc. v. United States, 8 Cust. Ct. 296, 1942 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 49 (cusc 1942).

Opinion

Dallinger, Judge:

This is a suit against the United States, arising-at the port of Portland, Oreg., brought to recover certain customs, duties alleged to have been improperly exacted on a particular importation invoiced as “Four 4/14" Sandberg Paper Pulps Diffuser Valves, Complete with Lifting Arrangement.” Duty was levied thereon at the rate of 45 per centum ad valorem under paragraph 397 of the Tariff Act of 1930 as manufactures of metal not specially provided for. It is claimed that said articles are properly dutiable at but 20 per centum ad valorem under the provision for “machines for making paper pulp or paper, not specially provided for, and parts thereof,, not specially provided for, wholly or in chief value of metal or porcelain,” incorporated in paragraph 372 of the Tariff Act of 1930 by virtue-of the trade agreement between the United States and Sweden-promulgated in T. D. 47785, 68 Treas. Dec. 19.

It is alternatively claimed that said articles are properly dutiable-at the rate of 27% per centum ad valorem under the following provision-incorporated in paragraph 353 of said act by virtue of the trade agreement between the United States and the United Kingdom, promulgated' in T. D. 49753, 74 Treas. Dec. 253:

Machines having as an essential feature an electrical element or device and which would be dutiable under paragraph 372, Tariff Act of 1930, if of a kind which [297]*297could be designed to operate without such electrical element or device (except articles of a class or kind with respect to which United States import duties have been reduced or bound against increase pursuant to any agreement heretofore concluded under section 350 of such act, as amended); all the foregoing, not specially provided for, finished or unfinished, wholly or in chief value of metal, and not provided for heretofore in any item numbered 353 in this schedule.

A further claim is made that the imported articles are properly dutiable at the rate of 25 per centum ad valorem under the following-provision in said paragraph 353 incorporated therein by virtue of said British Trade Agreement:

Electrical signaling, radio, welding, and ignition apparatus, instruments (other than laboratory), and devices, electrical generators, transformers, converters,, double current and motor generators, dynamotors, and all other articles suitable-for producing, rectifying, modifying, controlling, or distributing electrical energy,, and articles having as an essential feature an electrical element or device, such as electric motors, locomotives, portable tools, furnaces, heaters, ovens, refrigerators,, and signs (except telephone, wiring, diagnostic, and therapeutic apparatus,, instruments, and devices, primary cells, flashlights, switches, switch gear, fans, blowers, washing machines, and machines not herein provided for by name which-would be dutiable under paragraph 372, Tariff Act of 1930, if of a kind which-could be designed to operate without such electrical element or device, and except articles of a class or kind with respect to which United States import duties have-been reduced or bound against increase pursuant to any agreement heretofore-concluded under section 350 of such act, as amended); all the foregoing, not specially provided for, finished or' unfinished, wholly or in chief value of metal,, and not provided for heretofore in any item numbered 353 in this schedule.

Tbe plaintiff offered in evidence the testimony of a single witness,. Blaise Anthony Guttler, sales engineer, draftsman, and secretary of' the plaintiff-corporation, who testified that in his capacity as salesman he had supervised the installation of machinery in pulp mills; that, in the course of his duties he had visited every pulp mill in the United States; that he had seen valves identical with those invoiced herein, at the Chesapeake Camp Corporation of Franklin, Va.; that said, valves have only one use, namely, to be employed in conjunction with the pulp-making process; that said valves are shown on a blueprint, of an entire system, which blueprint was admitted in evidence as. illustrative exhibit A. The plaintiff then proceeded to testify in-part as follows:

Q. Will you please start at the beginning of the process, from the raw material,, and tell us how the paper pulp is produced. — A. There are various forms of pulp.. We have the Kraft caustic system, the sulphite process and the groundwood newsprint. This process we are interested in is in connection with the caustic. Our wood comes in log form, about four feet in length. The logs are chipped and' ground and then conveyed to the chip bin. This drawing starts with your chip, bin. The chips are conveyed into the digester, and in the digester the stock is-cooked under pressure. The pressure varies from 90 to say 110 pounds. After-the stock comes from the chip bin, it is cooked a certain number of hours. You-have a certain course and you follow that procedure. In this case, in this mill, they cook it for around six hours, and after your stock is cooked it is blown out. [298]*298of the digester under pressure into your diffuser tank, and while you blow the stock out of the digester into the diffuser tank, there is a supply of black liquor' that we want to recover. There are certain chemicals in the black liquor that we want to recover. So after we have the stock in the diffuser tank, we let the black liquor drain down, and we let that flow to our black liquor tank. We use that liquor to make up new liquor for the next cooking. After as much liquor as possible is drained down, we then force it down with water pressure. We take that down and it all goes into our makeup liquor. After that we turn on our diffuser valves, which are these Sandberg diffuser valves. The purpose of these valves is to empty your diffuser tank. That is done automatically and that fall goes down to your stock chest.
if: * * # H* * ifc
Q. Where does the srock go from the digester? — A. After your stock is cooked in your digester, it is blown into your diffuser, by pressure.
# ‡ ‡ * Hí *
Q. What is the source of that pressure? — A. That source can be either steam or it can be generated by coal or oil.
* * * # * # *
Q. Is the diffuser tank connected with the digester? — A. Yes, sir.
Q. In what way? — A. You must have the one with the other. The whole system is operated under pressure. You are blowing the stock under pressure from the digester and it goes into the diffuser.
Q. Can the digester be operated without the diffuser? — A. Not very well.
Q. What do you mean by that?1 — A. You have to have a means to get the stock out of the digester and the only way I know of is to use the diffuser.
Q. Just what does this valve do; that is, this Sandberg diffuser valve.
Judge Keefe. That is the importation?
Mr. Schwartz. Yes, sir.
A. That valve, the only thing it is for is to empty the diffuser.
By Mr. Schwartz.
Q. How does it do that? — A. It does it automatically.

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

Related

Gallagher & Ascher, Inc. v. United States
2 Cust. Ct. 468 (U.S. Customs Court, 1939)
Simon, Buhler & Baumann (Inc.) v. United States
8 Ct. Cust. 273 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1918)
United States v. Sheldon
15 Ct. Cust. 308 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1927)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
8 Cust. Ct. 296, 1942 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 49, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fibre-making-processes-inc-v-united-states-cusc-1942.