Ryer v. United States

28 Cust. Ct. 153, 1952 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 19
CourtUnited States Customs Court
DecidedApril 3, 1952
DocketC. D. 1403
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 28 Cust. Ct. 153 (Ryer 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
Ryer v. United States, 28 Cust. Ct. 153, 1952 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 19 (cusc 1952).

Opinion

Lawrence, Judge:

Plaintiff imported a mechanical device ¡mown as a MeCorquodale machine deriving its name from the English manufacturer and covered by letters patent 2,302,096 (exhibit 1) granted by the United States. It is described on the consular invoice as “One Press for applying pigments to sheet material.”

The collector of customs classified the importation as printing machinery and assessed duty thereon at the rate of 25 per centum ad valorem as provided in paragraph 372 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U. S. O. §1001, par. 372) which reads so far as applicable here as follows: “* * * printing machinery (except for textiles) * * * 25 per centum ad valorem * *

Plaintiff relies solely on the claim that the apparatus above described is neither printing machinery nor a printing machine and that its proper classification should be within the provision for “machines, finished or unfinished, not specially provided for,” and dutiable at 15 per centum ad valorem in accordance with the terms of paragraph 372, supra, as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 82 Tieas. Dec. 305, T. D. 51802.

The following exhibits were introduced by plaintiff:

Illustrative exhibit A — photograph of the imported machine.
Exhibit 1 — copy of the letters patent granted by the United States covering the machine in issue.
Illustrative exhibit B — one of the individual tanks which is contained within the large tank marked “A” on illustrative exhibit A.
Illustrative exhibit C — -the tubing, valve, and matrix through which the lacquer or pigment flows from the tank.
Illustrative exhibit D — color card or catalog sheet representing the colors of lipstick and nail polish. The colors but not the printed matter appearing thereon were made by the machine in controversy.
Illustrative exhibit E — -color card or sheet representing color work done by said machine.
Illustrative exhibit F — -color card which illustrates work done by the so-called chipping process.
Illustrative exhibit G — printed lithograph sheet representing the form in which it appears before any work has been performed by the MeCorquodale machine. On the inside of the sheet various color spaces are identified by name and number, where the colors are to be inserted by said machine.
Illustrative exhibit H — represents illustrative exhibit G after the color work has been performed by said machine.
[155]*155Illustrative exhibit I — leaflet illustrating color work performed by said machine.
Illustrative exhibit L — sheet illustrating the McCorquodale color spots. 1
Illustrative exhibit Q — business card of plaintiff’s attorney which was received in evidence to illustrate work done by the intaglio process. I

Defendant’s exhibits consist of the following:

Exhibit N — -color card produced on the McCorquodale machine.
Illustrative exhibit R — photograph of the Reinke printing press, a machine
which does not employ ink.

Each side introduced the testimony of two witnesses. Plaintiff’s] witness, Y. R. yincent, who, as a result of many years’ experience at various lands of'printing, was well qualified on the subject, testified that he was plant manager of the Cleveland division of Magill-Weinsheimer Co., the consignee of the imported machine; that the1 principal business of that company at Chicago was job printing and of the Cleveland division, the production of color cards. He was' one of the first persons in the United States to use the McCorquodale machine, and with the use of illustrative exhibit A, which is a photograph of said machine, he described its operation, pointing out that' a large tank marked “A” in the photograph is equipped with about 77 separate containers of individual colors. To quote the witness:,'

The material is contained — the material of a lacquer nature is contained in these individual containers. It flows down from the containers through flexible tubing through valves which control the shutoff of the tubing, marked “B” — the1 valves are not shown here — down through the matrix, marked “O.” The material' flows through the matrix and the function of the matrix is to confine the material! in a predetermined area so that when the matrix is in contact with the sheet the material flows through the matrix and can flow no further than the confines of the well. Then the matrix — or before that the valves are closed so that no more paint can flow through the matrix — then the matrix leaves contact from the’’ paper. I

The witness testified that the McCorquodale machine does not' utilize printing ink but, instead, a specially prepared lacquer stored in compartments similar to illustrative exhibit B which flows through! flexible tubing and continues down through a valve and the matrix represented by illustrative exhibit C. 1

In explaining the method by which color spots are produced on a sheet of paper in commercial practice, the witness testified:

Well, as your lacquer flows through the flexible tubing, through the valve, the matrix. Let’s say that the lacquer has already come down through the valve. The matrix comes in contact with a sheet of paper. It forms a seal. It is firmly down on that sheet of paper. At that time a mechanism in the press causes the1 valve stem to raise, which opens the small orifice in the valve. At that time it allows the lacquer to flow down through the valve on to the paper. The walls of the well on the under side of the matrix confine the flow of the lacquer so that it doesn’t spread. It confines it to a predetermined area. Then, at a fraction of a second, synchronized through the operation of the machine, the valve closes and the matrix breaks contact from the paper and you have the McCorquodale deposited spot.

[156]*156It further appears from the testimony of this witness that the lacquer flows directly through the tubes, valves, and the matrix onto the paper, and the color spot is deposited as a wet film one one-hundredth inch in thickness, and then the sheet of paper is carried away mechanically. He also testified that the lacquer is not transferred from the matrix to the paper, stating:

* * * The sole function of the matrix is only to confine the flow. It is not, in the language of printing, it is not transferred like from a plate to the paper. It is merely flowed directly on to the paper and the matrix confines the flow of the material.

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

Related

Trans Marine Shipping Co. v. United States
37 Cust. Ct. 192 (U.S. Customs Court, 1956)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
28 Cust. Ct. 153, 1952 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 19, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ryer-v-united-states-cusc-1952.