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 > 1995 HQ Rulings > HQ 956577 - HQ 956694 > HQ 956659

Previous Ruling Next Ruling
HQ 956659

October 21, 1994

CLA-2 CO:R:C:T 956659 BC


TARIFF NO.: 4810.29.0000

Paul R. Andrews
District Director of Customs
U.S. Customs Service
555 Battery Street
P.O. Box 2450
San Francisco, CA 94126

RE: Further review of protest no. 2809-94-100538; classification of coated art paper

Dear Director Andrews:

This is a decision on an application for further review of a protest timely filed by Ken Hashimoto, Attorney-in-fact, on behalf of Shin Ho USA, Inc. of Seattle, Washington. The protest objects to your decision concerning classification of the referenced coated art paper.


The protest covers two entries, dated October 12, 1993, and November 17, 1993. These entries were liquidated on January 28, 1994, and March 4, 1994, respectively. This protest was timely filed on April 21, 1994.

The entries protested cover merchandise described in the relevant invoices as "Both Sides Coated Art Paper (Pioneer Gloss Book)" and "One And Both Sides Coated Art Paper." At liquidation, the coated paper was classified in subheading 4810.29.0000, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States Annotated (HTSUSA), which provides for, among other things, clay coated paper of a kind used for printing, writing, or other graphic purposes, containing more than ten percent by weight of fibers obtained by a mechanical process, other than light-weight coated paper of heading 4810.21.0000, HTSUSA.

The PROTESTANT contends in this protest that the coated paper should be classified in subheading 4811.29.0000, HTSUSA, which provides for gummed or adhesive paper or paperboard, other than pressure-sensitive (paper or paperboard).


What is the correct classification for the coated art paper at issue?


PROTESTANT, in asserting that the coated papers were erroneously classified, refers to advice or information allegedly received from an unnamed Customs official at Seattle, to the effect that coated paper of the kind at issue is classifiable as claimed by PROTESTANT. No evidence of such advice or information, such as a ruling, was submitted with the protest.

Our National Import Specialist in paper and paper products advised us that the paper described in the relevant invoices is classifiable as coated paper in subheading 4810.29.0000, HTSUSA, and that subheading 4811.29.0000, HTSUSA, is not applicable to this kind of paper. Further, he informed us that various Customs ports/districts, including Customs Seattle, classify merchandise of the kind at issue in that subheading.

Upon review of the protest record before us, we have no reason to disagree with the NIS, nor with the classification decisions made for these entries at liquidation. Moreover, since this protest sets forth no more grounds to substantiate its claim than the above alleged advice/information supplied by an unnamed Customs official, we must conclude that this protest is denied for want of sufficient evidence.


This protest is DENIED. The coated paper at issue is classifiable in subheading 4810.29.0000, HTSUSA.

In accordance with Section 3A(11)(b) of Customs Directive 099 3550-065, dated August 4, 1993, Subject: Revised Protest Directive, this decision should be mailed by your office to the PROTESTANT no later than 60 days from the date of this letter. Any reliquidation of the entries in accordance with the decision must be accomplished prior to mailing of the decision. Sixty days from the date of the decision, the Office of Regulations and Rulings will take steps to make the decision available to Customs personnel via the Customs Rulings Module in ACS and the public via the Diskette Subscription Service, Freedom of Information Act, and other public access channels.


John Durant, Director

Previous Ruling Next Ruling

See also: