Schick X-Ray Co. v. United States

49 Cust. Ct. 38, 1962 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1317
CourtUnited States Customs Court
DecidedSeptember 19, 1962
DocketC.D. 2358
StatusPublished
Cited by17 cases

This text of 49 Cust. Ct. 38 (Schick X-Ray 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
Schick X-Ray Co. v. United States, 49 Cust. Ct. 38, 1962 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1317 (cusc 1962).

Opinion

Laweence, Judge:

The subject merchandise is described on the invoices as automatic high pressure injectors and various parts thereof or as cardio-angiography high pressure injectors and various parts thereof. Upon importation, the articles were classified by the collector of customs as surgical instruments, within the purview of paragraph 359 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. § 1001, par. 359), as modified by the Annecy Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 84 Treas. Dec. 403, T.D. 52373, supplemented by Presidential proclamation, 85 Treas. Dec. 116, T.D. 52462, and duty was imposed thereon at the rate of 45 per centum ad valorem.

Plaintiff claims the devices are not surgical instruments or parts of surgical instruments and makes various claims for classification at lower rates of duty, none of which claims has been abandoned. The claims and the order of their preference are as follows:

1. As electrical therapeutic (including diagnostic) apparatus and parts thereof, in chief value of metal, in paragraph 353 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. § 1001, par. 353), as modified by the Sixth Protocol of Supplementary Concessions to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 91 Treas. Dec. 150, T.D. 54108, at 15 per centum ad valorem.

2. As articles having electrical elements as essential features, in said paragraph 353, as modified by the Torquay Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 86 Treas. Dec. 121, T.D. 52739, at the rate of 13% per centum ad valorem.

3. As hospital utensils in chief value of steel in paragraph 339 of said act (19 U.S.C. § 1001, par. 339), as modified by the sixth protocol, su-pra, at 17 per centum ad valorem.

[40]*404. As parts of X-ray apparatus in said paragraph 353, as modified by the sixth propocol, supra, at 7y2 per centum ad valorem.

5. As laboratory apparatus in paragraph 360 of said act (19 U.S.C. § 1001, par. 360), as modified by the sixth protocol, supra, at 2514 per centum ad valorem.

At the trial of this case, but one witness was called, who testified on behalf of plaintiff, and the following exhibits were received in evidence:

Plaintiff’s exhibit 1 — a photograph of a complete unit as imported, except for the compressed air cylinder, which is identified by the letter “A” on the exhibit.

Plaintiff’s exhibit 2 — a photograph of the imported apparatus, except for the air cylinder marked “A,” which discloses the exposed portion of the unit.

Plaintiff’s exhibit 3 — consisting of three pages of descriptive literature, numbered “three,” “four,” and “five,” which contains pictures similar to exhibits 1 and 2 and, in addition, a picture of a top view of the apparatus, showing control buttons and instruments.

Peter M. Schick, president of Schick X-ray Co., Inc., plaintiff herein, was the witness called on behalf of plaintiff. He stated he is in charge of sales and all service arrangements for his company, which imports X-ray equipment, distributes it in the United States, and services and repairs said equipment. Schick, in addition to being an X-ray technician, is an electrical engineer and has been in the X-ray business for the last 28 years. Since 1953, he has sold and serviced equipment similar to the merchandise in issue and has sold it in every state of the Union, principally to large hospitals and clinics.

From the testimony of Schick, the following facts appear. The imported articles comprise electromechanical apparatus and parts used in the diagnosis of cardiac and cardiovascular diseases. Since a blood vessel or the heart cannot be shown in a plain X-ray, it is necessary to fill the heart or blood vessel with a dye or contrast medium. This dye or contrast medium must be sent through the human body at a very high rate of speed, because of the speed at which the blood circulates through the body. The imported apparatus consists of a pressure mechanism, a heating unit, which keeps the dye at body temperature, and an X-ray release mechanism. Although not imported with the apparatus, a needle, connected by polyethylene tubing to a “Luerlok” connector on the apparatus (indicated by the letter “B” on exhibit 1), is used. When the instant apparatus is in use, the needle, which is employed in conjunction therewith but which is not part of the importation, is inserted into the patient either by a doctor, a nurse, or the X-ray technician. The needle is inserted into any blood vessel, and the dye or contrast medium is released under-[41]*41control through the pressure mechanism into the blood system and, at the right moment, an X-ray filming device is released, which takes up to 12 exposures per second of the patient’s heart or blood system. The end result is to obtain X-ray films of a patient which show a heart defect, such as a leaking valve or a hole in the heart wall, which can then be treated by a physician.

The dye or contrast medium may be of any of several such liquids on the market produced by different firms. The dye contains a material which is X-ray opaque. Without the use of such a medium, X-rays would go through the blood vessel or heart without leaving a shadow, whereas the use of the dye or contrast medium makes it possible to produce a shadow of the heart or blood vessel.

The imported apparatus is operated by an X-ray technician who needs no special training, apart from experience with X-ray machines and the specific instructions which are provided when the units are delivered and installed. Anyone skilled in operating X-ray apparatus could use and does use the imported articles. The apparatus is not used as a tool by surgeons, but is used in the X-ray department of large hospitals and clinics for diagnostic purposes to permit a physician, after looking at the film, to determine the exact location of the cardiac or vascular defect. The imported apparatus is not used at any time during a surgical operation.

At point “X” in figure No. 12, on exhibit 2, there is a motor pump assembly which takes care of the circulation of warm water produced at figure 13. It consists of a water container, a heating unit, and a contract thermometer. The warm water is circulated throughout the unit, and a water jacket keeps the dye or contrast medium at the correct body temperature. Inside figure 13 there are additional containers of the contrast medium which can be kept at the right temperature for future use. Figure 7, on exhibit 2, depicts the instrument board where switches for the timing delay and the contact mechanism are located and to which all the electrical connections are made. In addition, there is an electrical heating unit. All of the foregoing portions are essential parts of the apparatus in question and are electrically operated.

The imported apparatus is portable and can be taken from one X-ray apparatus to another and is always used in connection with an X-ray unit.

The imported apparatus provides a uniform flow of the dye or contrast medium throughout the period of its functioning. The pressure and flow can be preset as can the temperature of the medium.

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

Related

Carmichael International Service, Inc. v. United States
62 Cust. Ct. 399 (U.S. Customs Court, 1969)
Schick X-Ray Co. v. United States
50 Cust. Ct. 323 (U.S. Customs Court, 1963)
International Expediters, Inc. v. United States
50 Cust. Ct. 294 (U.S. Customs Court, 1963)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
49 Cust. Ct. 38, 1962 Cust. Ct. LEXIS 1317, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schick-x-ray-co-v-united-states-cusc-1962.