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 0955016 - HQ 0955095 > HQ 0955088

Previous Ruling Next Ruling

HQ 955088

December 14, 1993

CLA-2 CO:R:C:T 955088 CMR


TARIFF NO: 6104.42.0010, 6211.43.0010, 6114.20.0052

Ms. Pamela Osterland
Radix Group International
1947 Providence Court
College Park, Georgia 30337

RE: Classification of certain women's garments; loungewear; sleepwear v. outerwear

Dear Ms. Osterland:

This ruling is in response to your requests of August 19, 1993, on behalf of Tamara Import, regarding the classification of various women's garments. We have consolidated your separate requests since the classification issue for the five samples submitted is the same. In your requests, you state the garments are sleepwear and may be imported from Taiwan, Singapore, Thailand, Philippines, Sri Lanka and/or Hong Kong. Our New York office has forwarded your submissions and samples to this office for a response.


Five sample garments were submitted along with sketches, garment specifications and a statement by the designer as to the intended use of the garments and manner in which they are to be marketed.

Style 90-684 is a women's full length jumpsuit made of 100 percent polyester woven fabric. The garment has long sleeves without cuffs, a round neckline, wide legs, and a front opening which extends from the neckline to just below the waist and is secured by four covered buttons. The garment is styled so that it is somewhat fitted at the waist.

Style 80-370 is a women's sleeveless pullover garment made of 60 percent cotton/40 percent polyester knit fabric. The garment has a crew neck and capping at the armholes. It extends to about mid-calf in length and has a 19-1/2 inch slit along the -2-
right side of the garment extending from the hem upwards to about mid-thigh. The garment has the appearance of a casual-style sleeveless pullover dress.

Style 90-370 is a women's short-sleeved, full length jumpsuit made of 60 percent cotton/40 percent polyester knit fabric. The garment has a rounded V-neckline trimmed with rib knit fabric, a large patch pocket at the right hip, wide legs, and a front opening which extends from the neckline to just below the waist secured by four large buttons.

Style 90-339 is a women's sleeveless, tank-styled jumpsuit made of 100 percent cotton knit fabric. The garment has a U- shaped neckline with a functional drawstring that ties in the front. It also features two-inch shoulder straps, an empire waist, wide legs and extends to about mid-calf.

Style 90-337 is made of 100 percent cotton knit fabric and is virtually identical to style 90-339 except it has a different print pattern on its fabric.


Are the submitted garments classifiable as sleepwear or as outerwear?


Classification of goods under the HTSUSA is governed by the General Rules of Interpretation (GRIs). GRI 1 provides that "classification shall be determined according to the terms of the headings and any relative section or chapter notes and, provided such headings or notes do not otherwise require, according to [the remaining GRIs taken in order]."

You seek classification of the subject garments as sleepwear based upon the following factors:

1. the garments themselves;
2. the garments are manufactured by a factory producing sleepwear and casual wear;
3. the garments are purchased at the wholesale level by sleepwear buyers and sold at retail in the sleepwear department of stores;
4. the garments would be advertised as sleepwear; 5. the importer of the garment is Vanity Fair through Tamara Import; and,
6. the designer has designed the garments for sleeping or lounging around the house.

In Mast Industries, Inc. v. United States, 9 CIT 549, 552 (1985), aff'd 786 F.2d 1144 (CAFC, April 1, 1986) the Court of International Trade dealt with the classification of a garment claimed to be sleepwear. The court cited several lexicographic sources, among them Webster's Third New International Dictionary's which defined "nightclothes" as "garments to be worn to bed." In Mast, the court determined that the garment at issue therein was designed, manufactured, and used as nightwear and therefore was classifiable as nightwear. Similarly, in St. Eve International, Inc. v. United States, 11 CIT 224 (1987), the court ruled the garments at issue therein were manufactured, marketed and advertised as nightwear and were chiefly used as nightwear.

The factors you submit as the basis for classification of the submitted garments as sleepwear appear to follow the factors enumerated by the court in both Mast and St.Eve. However, we are not persuaded that the garments at issue are principally "garments to be worn to bed".

The court in Mast took into consideration that the garment at issue therein was manufactured in the lingerie divisions of the Hong Kong factories producing the garment. The factory producing the garments at issue here is not solely a producer of sleepwear; it also produces casual wear. Therefore, we find no significance in regard to the manufacturing factory. As stated in HRL 951182 of June 18, 1992, information regarding the manufacturing factories may be of interest, but it is not determinative of the classification of the article in the United States.

You state the garments will be purchased by sleepwear buyers and sold in sleepwear departments. The environment of sale is a factor which may be considered, however, Customs recognizes that sleepwear and lingerie departments often sell a variety of merchandise other than intimate apparel, for example, garments known as leisure wear (i.e., loose, comfortable clothing worn in or outside the home in a casual environment). Therefore, while the environment of sale is a consideration, first and foremost is the garment itself. The court in Mast pointed out that "the merchandise itself may be strong evidence of use." Mast at 552, citing United States v. Bruce Duncan Co., 50 CCPA 43, 46, C.A.D. 817 (1963).

Having examined the garments at issue, we find nothing in their construction, fabric or styling to indicate that they are designed primarily for wear to bed. In fact, the fabrics and styling are suggestive of leisure wear or loungewear.

As to the designer's statement of the intended use of the garments and the claim regarding advertising, the National Import -4-

Specialist who handles this merchandise has supplied this office with marketing and advertising material from the Vanity Fair Five to Nine Catalogues. The catalogues were obtained from Vanity Fair in August 1993 and display current merchandise. The garments at issue here are displayed in the catalogues.

The Five to Nine collection is described as a combination of sleepwear and loungewear. It is described as:

* * * designed for the woman who wants comfort but won't sacrifice her demands for style. She wants easy-care merchandise that's versatile enough to wear on a run to the store, to answer the door, to lounge on a Saturday morning, and to sleep in. [emphasis added].

As stated earlier, nightwear as been defined as "garments worn to bed." Therefore, in order to be classified as nightwear, the garments at issue must be principally used as garments worn to bed. The advertising for the subject merchandise makes it clear that these garments are multi-purpose garments. They are not advertised as sleepwear; they are advertised as more than sleepwear. They are not principally to be worn to bed, but to be worn for a variety of reasons or occasions, including shopping. It is clear from the manner these garments are advertised that wearing them to bed is but one possible use to be considered along with many others.

While you have framed your request for classification of the subject garments as sleepwear in the context of the factors considered by the court in Mast, we do not consider the garments to be sleepwear. We cannot view these garments as sleepwear because they are not designed primarily to be worn to bed for sleeping. See, HRL 951032 of May 7, 1992. As these garments are not primarily or principally used as sleepwear, they cannot be classified as such.

The competing classification provisions for the garments at issue are the provision for knit dresses (heading 6104, HTSUSA), and the provisions for "other garments" in Chapters 61 and 62. Whereas classification as sleepwear is limited by definition to garments worn to bed, classification in the competing provisions is not so limited by use. Dress is a much broader term and encompasses garments which fall within the common and commercial understanding of the term dress and may be worn for a variety of purposes. Similarly, "other garments" is a basket provision including garments not more specifically provided for in other headings of the chapter.

Style 80-370 has the appearance of a casual knit dress and therefore is classifiable in heading 6104, HTSUSA. Jumpsuit is -5-
defined in Mary Brooks Picken's The Fashion Dictionary, at 210, as "a women's garment, all-in-one bodice and pants, worn as casual clothing or formal wear if made of fancy fabric". The remaining garments fit this description and are therefore considered jumpsuits. As a specific heading does not exist for these garments, they are classifiable in the respective headings in Chapters 61 and 62 for other garments, i.e., heading 6114, HTSUSA and 6211, HTSUSA.


Style 80-370 is classifiable as a women's knit cotton dress in subheading 6104.42.0010, HTSUSA, textile category 336, dutiable at 12.2 percent ad valorem.

Style 90-684 is classifiable as a women's woven jumpsuit in subheading 6211.43.0010, HTSUSA, which provides for women's woven other garments of man-made fibers: coveralls, jumpsuits and similar apparel: other. The garment falls within textile category 659 and is dutiable at 17 percent ad valorem.

Styles 90-370, 90-339 and 90-337 are classifiable as women's knit jumpsuits in subheading 6114.20.0052, HTSUSA, which provides for women's knit other garments of cotton; coveralls, jumpsuits and similar apparel, other. The garments fall within textile category 359 and are dutiable at 11.5 percent ad valorem.

The designated textile and apparel category may be subdivided into parts. If so, the visa and quota requirements applicable to the subject merchandise may be affected. Since part categories are the result of international bilateral agreements which are subject to frequent renegotiations and changes, to obtain the most current information available, we suggest you check, close to the time of shipment, the Status
Report On Current Import Quotas (Restraint Levels), an internal issuance of the U.S. Customs Service which is updated weekly and is available for inspection at your local Customs office.

Due to the changeable nature of the statistical annotation (the ninth and tenth digits of the classification) and the restraint (quota/visa) categories, you should contact your local Customs office prior to importation of this merchandise to determine the current status of any import restraints or requirements.


John Durant, Director

Previous Ruling Next Ruling

See also: