United States International Trade Commision Rulings And Harmonized Tariff Schedule
faqs.org  Rulings By Number  Rulings By Category  Tariff Numbers
faqs.org > Rulings and Tariffs Home > Rulings By Number > 1994 HQ Rulings > HQ 0952980 - HQ 0953260 > HQ 0953216

Previous Ruling Next Ruling

HQ 953216

APRIL 2 1993

CLA-2:CO:R:C:M 953216 JAS


TARIFF NO.: 7326.90.90, HTSUS

District Director of Customs
127 North Water St.
Ogdensburg, NY 13669

RE: Stic-Klip; 3-piece Metal Fastener; Nail, Heading 7317; Article of Iron or Steel; PRD 0712-92-101297

Dear Sir:

This is our decision on Application for Further Review of Protest No. 0712-92-101297, dated November 24, 1992, filed on behalf of Eckel Industries of Canada Ltd., against your action in liquidating an entry of metal fasteners from Canada.


A submitted sample consists of a 7 3/8 inch-long #11 gauge wire welded perpendicular to a 2 inch x 2 inch base plate with forty nine (49) perforations. A special clip fitted over the wire was not sent with the sample. The three components are of electrolytic zinc coated steel. Using one stic-klip per sq. ft., the article is designed for attaching insulation materials to concrete, metal and other surfaces. The base plate is bonded to a surface using an adhesive and the insulation fitted over the wire and fastened by the clip.

The fasteners were entered under the provision for nails and similar articles, of iron or steel, of one piece construction made of round wire, in 7317.00.55, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Protestant offers no factual or legal arguments in support of this classification.

The concerned import specialist contends that this 3-piece article is not a nail in the commercial sense and liquidated the entry under subheading 7326.90.90, HTSUS, as other articles of iron or steel. - 2 -


Whether the 3-piece stic klip steel fastener is a nail or similar article of heading 7317.


Under 19 U.S.C. 1514(c)(1), a protest of a decision under subsection (a) of section 1514 must set forth distinctly and specifically each decision as to which protest is made. In addition, the Customs Regulations require that a protest set forth the nature of, and justification for the objection set forth distinctly and specifically with respect to each decision. 19 CFR 174.13(a)(6).

In acting on a protest, Customs lacks the legal authority to assume facts and arguments that are not presented and, therefore, not in the official record. In this case, protest is properly made against your decision to liquidate the entry under subheading 7326.90.90, HTSUS. However, protestant has submitted no evidence in support of his claim under subheading 7117.00.50. The limited documentation submitted is insufficient to allow us to independently determine the validity of the claim.


Based on protestant's failure to comply with the requirements of 19 CFR 174.13(a)(6), this protest should be denied. A copy of this decision should be attached to the Customs Form 19 and mailed to the protestant, through his representative, as part of the notice of action on the protest.


John Durant, Director

Previous Ruling Next Ruling

See also: