United States v. N. Shure Co.

21 C.C.P.A. 296, 1933 CCPA LEXIS 218
CourtCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals
DecidedDecember 4, 1933
DocketNo. 3658
StatusPublished

This text of 21 C.C.P.A. 296 (United States v. N. Shure Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Customs and Patent Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. N. Shure Co., 21 C.C.P.A. 296, 1933 CCPA LEXIS 218 (ccpa 1933).

Opinions

Graham, Presiding Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court:

Certain cloisonné ware was imported and two entries thereof made at the port of Chicago. This consisted of certain vases, lily bowls, and water-nut jars. The collector classified certain of the imported vases and bowls under paragraph 397 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as articles or wares plated with gold, at 65 per centum ad valorem, and classified a part of the articles designated by the collector as “gold-plated metal jars,” as “hollow or flat ware, not specially provided for,” plated with gold, at 65 per centum ad valorem, under paragraph 339 of said act.

In its protest covering entry No. 1498, the importer claimed the goods to be dutiable at only 45 per centum ad valorem, under paragraph 397 of said act, as articles or wares composed of base metal, but not plated with gold. An alternative claim was that the goods were dutiable at 40 per centum under paragraph 339 of said act, as articles composed of base metal, not plated with gold. There was also another alternative claim under said paragraph 339, as articles composed of iron or steel and enameled, at 30 per centum ad valorem and 5 cents per pound.

In its protest covering entry No. 1499, claims were made under the same paragraphs, omitting, however, the last-named claim under said paragraph 339.

The United States Customs Court sustained the protests under said paragraph 397, ancl overruled them in all other respects. From the resulting judgment the Government has appealed, claiming error in said judgment under said paragraph.

On the trial in the court below, two witnesses were called by the protestant, and samples of the goods in question were offered. A description of one of them, Exhibit 1, will be sufficient for the purposes of this case. This exhibit is a vase about 9 inches in height, made of cloisonné, in chief value of copper. Upon the exterior surface of this vase, in the ordinary cloisonné method, a network of wires is laid, and afterwards filled with enamel. Around the mouth of the vase is a lip, or band, about five-eighths inch in width, which is covered with what has the appearance of gold plating. This extends over and down into the mouth of the vase for about l){ inches. Around the bottom of the vase is a similar rim about one-fourth inch in width, which is likewise covered by a similar plating, which plating extends over the edge of the rim and completely over the bottom of the vase, which is approximately 2% inches in diameter. The other exhibits have varying amounts of a similar plating, and although in some vases [298]*298tbe amount of plating is somewhat smaller, we believe Exhibit 1 may be taken as fairly typical of all.

Paragraphs 339 and 397 are as follows:

Par. 339. Table, household, kitchen, and hospital utensils, and hollow or flat ware, not specially provided for: Plated with platinum or gold, 65 per centum ad valorem; plated with silver, 50 per centum ad valorem; composed of iron or steel and enameled or glazed with vitreous glasses, 5 cents per pound and 30 per centum ad valorem; composed wholly or in chief value of aluminum, 8¡4 cents per pound and 40 per centum ad valorem; composed wholly or in chief value of copper, brass, steel, or other base metal, not plated with platinum, gold, or silver, and not specially provided for, 40 per centum ad valorem; the foregoing rates shall apply to the foregoing articles whether or not containing electrical heating elements as constituent parts thereof.
Par. 397. Articles or wares not specially provided for, if composed wholly or in chief value of platinum, gold, or silver, and articles or wares plated with platinum, gold, or silver, or colored with gold lacquer, whether partly or wholly manufactured, 65 per centum ad valorem; if composed wholly or in chief value of iron, steel, lead, copper, brass, nickel, pewter, zinc, aluminum, or other metal, but not plated with platinum, gold, or silver, or colored with gold lacquer, whether partly or wholly manufactured, 45 per centum ad valorem.

The issue arose in the consideration of the question as to whether the articles might be said to be gold-plated. There is no issue here as to whether they are, or are not, colored with gold lacquer, as provided for in said paragraph 397, nor is there any issue as to whether they are, or are not, household utensils or hollow or flat ware, and for those reasons, those questions are not considered. The only question is, as has been stated, whether they are gold-plated.

Two witnesses were called to testify by the importer — A. J. Rinkenberger, manager of the import department of the appellant, and James B. Child, one of the examiners at the port of Chicago.

The following is all the testimony which appears in the record on the point made by the appellant that the imported articles are not gold plated. The witness Rinkenberger testified:

Q. So that your real claim or contention is that they are not gold-plated? — A. That is the contention, that they are not.
Q. That they are not Do you know as to the method used in preparing these, making them? — A. Not from personal observation, only as told me.
Q. What do you term them, what kind of ware is it? — A. It is known as a commercial grade of cloisonné ware.
* * # # * * *
X Q. What kind of plating is in these samples, Mr. Rinkenberger? — A. It is what is known by us as a gold wash.
X Q. Well, don’t you sell them as-. A. (Continuing.) Only on the — the gold wash is on the exposed metal flange at the top and bottom and 2 inches down in the mouth of the vase.
X Q. (Continuing.) Well, you don’t sell them as gold wash? — A. No; we sell them as cloisonnés only; it is sold as cloisonné ware.
X Q. Don’t you refer to them when selling as gold-plated? — A. No, sir; they are never referred to as being gold-plated.
[299]*299X Q. Cloisonné has different kinds of plating, hasn’t it? — A. Not this kind of ware that we buy.
X Q. Well, they have different kinds of plating? — A. This is the only kind that we have ever handled. This is the cheapest grade of cloisonné ware that is made.

The witness Child testified:

Q. Did you find as the result of your test that the amount of gold contained in the articles like the exhibits 1 to 4 was or not what you might say infinitesimal?
Hi Hs Hí H* H:
A. The examination and test showed that gold existed in each of the articles tested to such an extent that it could be determined.
Q. I am asking you to what extent did you find it to be present. Was it quite small? — A. Yes, quite a small .quantity. '
Q. Would you say that it was less than one fourth of 1 percent? — A. The quantity?
Q. Yes. — A. As to the whole article?
Q. Yes. — A. Much less than that.
Q. Much less. And where, if at all, was the gold present, according to what you ascertained, in what part or portion of the pieces? Say that you take exhibit no. 4.' — -A. On exhibit no.

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

Related

Saji & Kariya Co. v. United States
9 Ct. Cust. 78 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1919)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
21 C.C.P.A. 296, 1933 CCPA LEXIS 218, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-n-shure-co-ccpa-1933.