International Selling Corp. v. United States

62 Cust. Ct. 23, 294 F. Supp. 642, 1969 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 3688
CourtUnited States Customs Court
DecidedJanuary 15, 1969
DocketC.D. 3669
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 62 Cust. Ct. 23 (International Selling Corp. 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
International Selling Corp. v. United States, 62 Cust. Ct. 23, 294 F. Supp. 642, 1969 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 3688 (cusc 1969).

Opinion

LaNdis, Judge:

Plaintiff has filed protests in these four cases, consolidated for trial, involving merchandise imported from France into the port of New York. The merchandise was described in the official entry papers as activated alumina and was shipped in the form of tiny balls ranging in diameter from 2 to 5 millimeters. The parties agree that the activated alumina was imported for sale and use as a des-sicant or drying agent for liquids and gases.

Customs officials at New York classified the alumina in TSUS schedule 5, part 1, subpart K as a mineral substance or an article of mineral substances, not specially provided for, not decorated, dutiable at 15 per centum ad valorem under item 523.91. Plaintiff claims that activated alumina should be classified in TSUS schedule 4, part 2, subpart C as an aluminum compound, namely alumina, dutiable at 0.25 cent per pound under item 417.12. The competing classifications, in the TSUS context, are as follows:

Assessed: Schedule 5 - Part 1.
Subpart K. - Nonmetallic Minerals and Products Not Specially Provided For
* * * * * * *
Mineral substances, and articles of mineral substances, not specially provided for:
523.81 Mineral substances, crude_ * * *
Other:
523. 91 Not decorated_ 15% ad val.
Claimed: Schedule 4 - Part 2.
Subpart C-Inorganic Chemical Compounds
* * * * * * *
Aluminum compounds:
* * * * * * *
417.12 Hydroxide and oxide (alumina)1_0.25(4 per lb.
$$$$$$$

Schedule 4, part 2, of the TSUS is essentially the “basket” part of the schedule and includes all the important inorganic and organic chemicals itemized separately which are not specially provided for [25]*25elsewhere in the schedule. “Appropriate headnotes indicate the proper category for such chemicals which might be subject to dual classification.” (Tariff Classification Study, 1960, Schedule 4, page 55.) Sub-part K of schedule 5, part 1, contains the basket provision for mineral substances and articles of mineral substances. “But, as set forth in the headnote, * * * [subpart K] does not include mineral substances which are provided for in schedule 4 * * * except part 2 thereof, or which are sufficiently pure to be regarded as elements or compounds falling within the said part 2 * * (Tariff Classification Study, 1960, Schedule 5, page 38.)

The headnotes referred to in the Classification Study are part of the substantive law of TSUS. The appropriate headnotes are as follows:

Schedule 4 headnotes:
1. This schedule does not include — ■
(i) any of the mineral products provided for in schedule 5;
‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ $
[Schedule 4.] Part 2 headnotes:
1. This part covers chemicals, except those provided for elsewhere in this schedule and those specially provided for in any of the other schedules.
# * * * 3* * *
[Schedule 5-Part 1.] Subpart K headnote:
1. This subpart covers mineral substances and articles of mineral substances, not provided for elsewhere in the schedules, but does not include:
(i) chemical elements or chemical compounds in part 2 of schedule 4, or mineral substances provided for in other parts of schedule 4; * * *

We read the above headnotes to mean that in the case of merchandise which might be subject to dual classification under schedule 5 or schedule 4, schedule 5 must be given preference except in the instance of those mineral substances under subpart K thereof, which are chemical elements or chemical compounds provided for in part 2 of schedule 4, or mineral substances provided for in other parts of schedule 4. What this means in terms of the disputed classification here is that item 417.12 is relatively more specific than item 523.91 as to merchandise subject to dual classification under either. As we shall discuss, we are of the opinion and hold that the activated alumina of these protests is properly dutiable under TSUS item 417.12, as plaintiff claims.

On trial, three witnesses testified for plaintiff. One witness testified for defendant. The commercial invoice, purchase order, and acknowledgment of the purchase order filed with the official customs entry [26]*26papers in eacb protest, along with the customs laboratory reports attached to the entry papers in protests 66/47484 and 66/56098 are in evidence. (E. 3.) A representative sample of the imported activated alumina is of record, exhibit 1, as is a page from the brochure of Aluminum Company of America advertising “Alcoa Activated Alu-minas and alumina gels - either granular or ball form” for dessicating jobs. Exhibit 2. The material facts which are not in dispute can be briefly summarized.

The imported activated alumina in these protests was processed from bauxite by Pechiney-Saint-Gobain, a French firm. Bauxite is an impure aluminum oxide containing an indeterminate quantity of water molecules and other impurities. To start the process, the bauxite is crushed into a fine powder and heated with a mixture of caustic soda to form a slurry. The slurry is next reheated in an apparatus called a digestor to form a solution of almost pure aluminum oxide. The impurities, which do not go into solution and remain as solids, are removed from the liquid. It, the liquid, is cooled and, as it cools, the aluminum oxide separates or precipitates in a crystalline form known as aluminum oxide trihydrate. The trihydrate is then washed, dried, and passed through an oven, heated to about 1,500 degrees Fahrenheit, for a period of one-half to one second. That amount of heat drives off almost all the water of hydration bound to the aluminum oxide. What results is hydrated aluminum oxide in the form of a fine powder containing approximately one-half molecule of water with a tendency to self-agglomerate. The tendency to self-agglomerate is utilized to form the powder into little balls, which is done by rotating the powder in a pan pitched to a 45 or 50 degree angle. As they form and reach various sizes, the balls fall through the bottom of the pan. Trihydrate aluminum oxide, heated to drive off all water results in an end product called corundum, a product completely anhydrous or free of water. Chemically the terms alumina and aluminum oxide are used interchangeably to describe the whole family of aluminiun oxide, whether hydrated or anhydrous. Commercially, activated alumina in the ball form offers some advantages over activated alumina in the self-agglomerated granular form when used as a drying agent.

We thus come down to the fact that this activated alumina is aluminum oxide. Defendant concedes it is a form of aluminum oxide. While the ball form of alumina offers some advantages over the granular form of activated alumina as a drying agent, defendant’s witness admitted that activated alumina is a form of aluminum oxide. (E. 78.) The term activated signifies that the surface of the alumina is such that moisture or water vapor can adhere to it. (E. 29.)

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

Related

Austin Chemical Co., Inc. v. United States
659 F. Supp. 229 (Court of International Trade, 1987)
A.N. Deringer, Inc. v. United States
10 Ct. Int'l Trade 577 (Court of International Trade, 1986)
Border Brokerage Co. v. United States
64 Cust. Ct. 331 (U.S. Customs Court, 1970)
W. R. Filbin & Co. v. United States
63 Cust. Ct. 200 (U.S. Customs Court, 1969)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
62 Cust. Ct. 23, 294 F. Supp. 642, 1969 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 3688, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/international-selling-corp-v-united-states-cusc-1969.