Flex Track Equipment, Ltd. v. United States

65 Cust. Ct. 119, 1970 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 3074
CourtUnited States Customs Court
DecidedAugust 12, 1970
DocketC.D. 4063
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 65 Cust. Ct. 119 (Flex Track Equipment, Ltd. 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
Flex Track Equipment, Ltd. v. United States, 65 Cust. Ct. 119, 1970 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 3074 (cusc 1970).

Opinion

Landis, Judge:

On February 11, 1965, plaintiffs imported from Canada merchandise invoiced as “10 Bolls Comprising 10-onlt A213 Arctic Track Treads B'JSTllO”. The invoice additionally noted that the merchandise was intended as parts for Muskeg motor tracked vehicles. Plaintiffs entered the merchandise at Blaine, Washington, under the tariff classification for parts of tractors, not suitable for agricultural use, TSUS (Tariff Schedules of the United States) item 692.35, dutiable at 11.5 per centum ad valorem,

[120]*120In its review and liquidation of the entry, customs at Blaine classified the merchandise as belting for machinery, dutiable at Iff per centum ad valorem, under TSUS item 358.10.1

Plaintiffs protested the customs classification (19 U.S.C., section 1514), and claimed the merchandise should be assessed with duty under one or the other of several tariff classifications identified as TSUS items 692.27; 692.25; 773.35 and 692.30. Customs denied those protest claims and the protest is here to determine the proper classification of the imported merchandise as provided by law. 19 U.S.C., section 1515.

Plaintiffs in this court limit their protest to the claim for classification under TSUS item 692.25.2 The claims under TSUS items 773.35 3 and 692.30 4 are deemed abandoned and will be dismissed.

The tariff classifications brought before us provide, in pertinent part, as follows:

Classified:
Schedule 3, part 4, subpart C:
Belting and belts, for machinery:
Of vegetable fibers, or of such fibers and rubber or plastics:
$$$$$$$
358.10 In part of rubber or plastics- 16% ad val.
Claimed:
Schedule 6, part 6, subpart B:
Motor vehicles (except motorcycles) for the transport of persons or articles:
Motor vehicles specially constructed and equipped to perform special services or functions, such as, but not limited to, fire engines, mobile cranes, wreckers, concrete mixers, and mobile clinics-* * *
* * * ■ * * * *
[121]*121Chassis, bodies (including cabs), and parts of the foregoing motor vehicles:
* *
Other:
* *
692.25 Other_ 8.5% ad val.

On this record, we conclude that the imported merchandise is designed and used to function as more than belting for machinery and sustain the protest claim under TSUS item 692.25.

Two witnesses testified for plaintiffs. In addition the following documentary evidence was introduced, viz: Samples illustrative of the merchandise imported, except for their length (exhibits 1 and 3); a brochure put out by plaintiffs, with a picture and diagram of how the imported merchandise is used on a crawler tracked motor vehicle (exhibit 2); and two letters written by Mr. Geoffrey C. Agassiz, one of the witnesses, referring to the imported merchandise as “track treads or belts” (exhibits A and B).

The facts, established by the testimony and exhibits, we next summarize, are undisputed. The material from which the imported merchandise was processed in Ganada was made by a rubber company following plaintiffs’ specifications for a “low temperature stock because most of the machines are going into arctic areas.” (B. 13.) We measure exhibit 1, the sample in evidence, to be about five-eighths of an inch thick. The core of exhibit 1, a woven ply vegetable fiber, is covered with rubber. The material was ordered in a 15-inch width for use with plaintiffs’ Nodwell BN110 and 75 tracked vehicles. Similar material was also ordered in other widths, depending on the weight and size of the vehicle for which intended.

When the material is received in Canada from the rubber company, it is processed to fit a particular size tracked vehicle. In this case, the material was cut in Canada to specific lengths, either 33 feet and 3 inches or 33 feet and 6 inches (the witness was not sure which, but knew it was a specified length), and %6-inch holes were punched throughout the width and length of the cut belting. The holes are evenly spaced, 4%6 inches apart, three across the width, in three rows of 82 holes throughout the length. (B. 15.) The merchandise (hereinafter referred to as articles), as imported, was in the condition cut to specific length and with holes punched as described. The length, number and spacing of the holes, all of which may vary according to the size vehicle for which intended, fit the imported articles for use on a No dwell BN110 motor vehicle like that pictured in exhibit 2.

The Nodwell BN110 pictured in exhibit 2 looks to be a large heavyweight specially constructed motor driven vehicle. It features a cab [122]*122for the driver and his instruments. The cab stands mounted high on the front end of the vehicle which appears to have four inside and four outside ground level wheels on each side. At the rear of the vehicle, on each side, there is a drive sprocket (a wheel with teeth to engage links as on a bicycle). The drive sprocket is off the ground, to the rear of the eight ground wheels, so that it sits center between the inside and outside ground level wheels. An off ground turning wheel is similiarly situated at the front end of the vehicle. Laced around the front turning wheel, rear drive sprocket, and the inside and outside ground wheels, on each side of the vehicle, are crawler treads or tracks assembled, in part, from the imported articles.

It takes two of the approximately 33-foot imported flexible lengths, punched with holes, to make one track assembly, plus 164 backing plates, 492 track bolts and nuts, and 82 grouser bars (cleats on a tractor wheel or track for increasing traction, Webster’s Third New International Dictionary, 1968 edition). (E. 11.) The track is assembled in the following manner described by Mr. Agassiz:

To assemble the track it would be necessary to lay two belts out on a surface, a flat surface, whether the ground or an assembly table, and putting, inserting the backing plate underneath the track tread or belt and placing the grouser bar on top of the track tread or belt and then inserting the bolts through each one of the three holes in each track tread and tightening same.

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

Related

Nadel Industries, Inc. v. United States
19 Ct. Int'l Trade 573 (Court of International Trade, 1995)
Mitsubishi Electronics America, Inc. v. United States
19 Ct. Int'l Trade 378 (Court of International Trade, 1995)
Border Brokerage Co. v. United States
81 Cust. Ct. 5 (U.S. Customs Court, 1978)
United States v. Flex Track Equipment Ltd.
458 F.2d 148 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1972)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
65 Cust. Ct. 119, 1970 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 3074, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/flex-track-equipment-ltd-v-united-states-cusc-1970.