HQ 958116: Tariff classification of lap pack; subheadings 4202.92.9025and 4202.92.9040

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 958116

                          July 28, 1995


CLA-2 CO:R:C:T 958116 NLP

CATEGORY: Classification

TARIFF NO.: 4202.92.9040

Ms. Lisa Borter
Adduci, Mastriani, Schaumberg, Meeks & Shill, L.L.P
3300 Madison Avenue
39th Floor
New York, NY 10017

RE: Tariff classification of lap pack; subheadings 4202.92.9025
and 4202.92.9040

Dear Ms. Borter:

     On June 14, 1995, Customs issued to your client , Manco,
Inc., District Ruling Letter
(DD) 810953, which classified a lap pack in subheading
4202.92.9025, Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States Annotated (HTSUSA).  In a letter to
Customs Headquarters,
dated June 21, 1995, you requested a reconsideration of DD 810953
and also stated that the
importer has made a few minor physical changes to the product
since the hand sample was
submitted with DD 810953.  You provided us with two sample lap
packs that have
incorporated these changes.  We have reviewed this matter and our
decision follows.

FACTS:

     DD 810953 dealt with classification of a lap pack.  We note
that no style number 
was given for this lap pack.  This ruling stated that the article
appeared to be a fitted carrying
case for a lap top computer.  It had an exterior surface of woven
nylon and had foam between
the outer surface and the case's lining on all sides.  The lap
pack case measured
approximately 14 inches by 11 inches by 3 inches deep.  It was
designed to be carried on the
back and had adjustable straps with snap fasteners plus a carry
handle.  The exterior of the
case had a large zippered pocket beneath the carrying straps and
a smaller zippered pouch on
either side of the case.  The top flap of the interior of the
case had a large envelope type
closure plus a clear plastic pouch with a zippered closure. 
Loosely placed inside the clear
envelope was a plastic label which contained a block for the
owners name and address and it
also had a drawing of a duck on it.
                               -2-
     DD 810953 classified the lap pack in subheading
4202.92.9025, HTSUS, which
provides for "[t]runks, suitcases... binocular cases, camera
cases, musical instrument cases...
and similar containers;...[o]ther: [w]ith outer surface of
sheeting plastic or of textile
materials: [o]ther: [w]ith outer surface of textile materials:
[o]ther: of man-made
fibers."  The rate of duty is 19.8% ad valorem and the applicable
textile quota category is
670.

     In your letter of June 21, 1995, you contend that the lap
pack' exterior surface is
made of PVC and not of a woven nylon fabric.  As a result, the
lap pack should be
classifiable in subheading 4202.92.90.40, HTSUSA, which provides
for [t]runks, suitcases...
binocular cases, camera cases, musical instrument cases... and
similar containers;...[o]ther:
[w]ith outer surface of sheeting of plastic or textile materials:
[o]ther: [o]ther: [o]ther."

     Moreover, you note that the importer has made a "few minor
physical changes "to the
product since the hand sample was submitted with the District
ruling request.  First, Velcro
strips have been added to the exterior top of the lap pack so
that a note pad may be securely
affixed and the pack can then be used as a drawing surface. 
Second, a shallow mesh netting
pocket has also been added to the exterior to hold pencils or
crayons while the top surface is
used as a lap desk.  The netting has a little round emblem with
the picture of a duck.  Third, 
the Velcro strips and the loosely placed plastic name label on
the interior of the lap pack
classified in DD 810953 have both been eliminated.  In the
subject lap pack there is a 
location on the interior surface designated for the owner to
write his or her name.  You
submitted two sample lap packs that incorporates these changes. 
These lap packs are
identical except for their color combinations.

     In a subsequent telephone conversation you informed us of
the style numbers for the
lap packs.  They are as follows:  style number 22000 is a blue,
red and black lap pack and
style number 22001 is a purple, pink and teal lap pack.  Your
client is also importing style
numbers 22003 and 22004.  These styles consist of the subject lap
packs but are grouped in
set of 6.  Each package contains three of the primary color lap
packs and three of the jewel
color lap packs.  They have different style numbers as they are
being sent to different 
vendors.

     In your letter of June 21, 1995, you also make certain
clarifications to statements made
in DD 810953.  First, the article is manufactured in China and is
being exported to the U.S.
From Hong Kong.  Second, you stated that the lap pack is intended
for use by children to
carry such things as school supplies, books, pencils, crayons,
notepads, etc...
Third, DD 810953 indicated that the duck drawing appeared to
resemble a Disney character
and therefore, may represent a copyright infringement.  You state
that the duck logo is a
registered trademark of Manco, Inc.

ISSUE:
 
     What is the tariff classification of the submitted lap
packs?

                               -3-

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

     Section 177.9(a)(2), Customs Regulations (19 CFR
177.9(a)(2)), states the following:

     Each ruling letter setting forth the proper classification
of an article under the
     provision of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United
States will be
     applied only with respect to transactions involving articles
identical to the
     sample submitted with the ruling request or to articles
whose description is
     identical to the description set forth in the ruling letter.

     DD 810953 classified a lap pack in subheading 4202.92.9025,
HTSUSA.  This 
classification was based on the Dallas District's examination of
the sample that was submitted
to them.  However, the lap pack before us now incorporates
certain features not present in
the lap pack that was the subject of DD 810953.  Based on the
above regulation, as the
submitted samples and the article described in DD 810953 are not
identical, DD 810953 is
not applicable to the subject lap packs and is not precedent for
the classification of these
items.  Our holding in this ruling is applicable to style numbers
22000, 22001, 22003 and
22004.

     After examining the samples in our possession and consulting
with the National Import Specialist who handles classifications
of this kind, we agree that the lap pack bags submitted to us
have an outer surface of PVC.  Therefore, they are classifiable
in subheading
4202.92.9040, HTSUSA, which provides for "[t]runks,
suitcases...binocular cases, camera
cases, musical instrument cases... and similar
containers;...[o]ther: [w]ith outer surface of
sheeting of plastic or of textile materials: [o]ther: [o]ther:
[o]ther."

HOLDING:

     Lap pack style numbers 22000, 22001, 22003 and 22004 are
classifiable in
subheading 4202.92.9040, HTSUSA, which provides for "[t]runks,
suitcases... binocular
cases, camera cases, musical instrument cases... and similar
containers;... [o]ther: [w]ith outer
surface of sheeting of plastic or of textile materials: [o]ther:
[o]ther: [o]ther."  The rate of
duty is 19.8% ad valorem.

     DD 810953 cannot be applied with respect to transactions
involving the articles
described in this ruling.

                              Sincerely,


                              John Durant, Director
                              Commercial Rulings Division