HQ 953010: Classification of women's hooded pullover; jacket v. shirt; proper classification, shirt, subheading 6211.42.0050, HTSUSA

Native CBP ruling rendition. Applicability is fact-specific; modification/revocation relationships and original publisher date are retained. Publisher sentinel year0001 means unknown date, not a historical legal adoption.

                            HQ 953010
                        December 18, 1992

CLA-2  CO:R:C:T  953010  jb

CATEGORY:  Classification

Diane L. Weinberg, Esq.
Sandler, Travis & Rosenberg, P.A.
505 Park Avenue
New York, NY 10022-1106

RE:  Classification of women's hooded pullover; jacket v. shirt;
     proper classification, shirt, subheading 6211.42.0050,
     HTSUSA

Dear Ms. Weinberg:

     This is in response to your letter, dated November 27, 1992,
on behalf of your client, Angelique Imports Inc.,  regarding the
classification of a women's hooded pullover from India.

     On September 25, 1992, the Area Director, JFK Airport,
issued ruling DD 877853 in response to a ruling request from
Angelique Imports.  That ruling classified a garment, Style 60752
as a cotton jacket in subheading 6202.92.2060, HTSUSA, with a 335
quota category.  Subsequently, Angelique Imports asked the
National Import Specialist, New York Seaport, that the finding in
that ruling be extended to other garments in its product line.
That request was denied.  Subsequent garments, were given a
blouse classification in subheading 6211.42.0050, HTSUSA, with a
341 quota category.  You ask that we confirm the application of
DD 877853 to all of the series 36 and 60 garments regardless of
pattern or weight.

     At our request, a report on the subject was prepared by the
National Import Specialist and submitted to this office.  Our
findings are as follows:

     1. The Pre-entry Classification portion of the Pre-        
        Importation Review Program is geared to accommodate      
        ranges of merchandise; a ruling on one style does not   
        suffice. To do otherwise results in a manipulation of the 
        ruling process, by allowing an importer to submit a      
        single style at a time until a favorable ruling is      
        obtained. If Angelique Imports had intended to have its  
         entire line governed by one ruling, it should have      
        applied for a Pre-Classification ruling for the line in  
        its entirety- and not just one particular style number. 
     2. Previous to receiving DD 877853, Angelique Imports      
        already had a shipment detained at JFK for a 341        
        category visa. Without alluding to that                  
        information, it went ahead and requested a ruling on     
        Style 60752 despite that detained shipment. Thus, only   
        after obtaining a favorable ruling, did it request that  
        the finding in DD 877853 be extended to its entire line.

     3. Style 60752 was classified solely on the basis of its   
        physical features, i.e., without the benefit of an       
        examination of the product line in its entirety.  
 
     4. Though the classification of garments is aided by the use
        of the quota category guidelines (CIE 13/88), they are   
        only to be regarded as one of the many classification   
        tools. The CIE are used principally to ensure uniformity
        of classification but do not constitute rigid rules of   
        classification.  

     5. In this case, Style 60752 is distinguishable from other  
        articles in the series.  The presence of these           
        distinguishing features are determinative of the         
        articles' classification.  These distinguishing features
        can be identified as follows:

          a. though the other styles are made from fabric weight
             heavier than Style 60752, it is still considered a  
             shirting fabric and its weight, relative to Style   
             60752, and not determinative of its classification.
          
          b. the fit, cut and sizing of the garment do not       
             indicate use as a jacket, i.e., designed to be worn
             over other outer garments.
 
     Based on the foregoing, it is our belief that as the
garments at issue will not be worn over other outer garments, but
will be worn as a shirt, the garments should be so classified.
Accordingly, we find that the classification determination issued
in DD 877853 does not have application to any other style
garments in the 36 and 60 series.

     Proper classification of the subject garments is in
subheading 6211.42.0050, HTSUSA, which provides for blouses,
shirts, and shirt-blouses, sleeveless tank styles and similar
upper body garments, excluded from heading 6206.  The applicable
rate of duty is 8.6 percent ad valorem and the textile category
is 341.

     



As a result of the foregoing, DD 877853 is currently under
review.  As such, you will be afforded the opportunity to submit
further arguments in regard to that issue.   



                           Sincerely,


 

                           John Durant, Director
                           Commercial Rulings Division