HQ 084302: Decision on Application for Further Review of Protest No. 1001-7-010775.

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 084302

                                   August 29, 1990



          CLA-2:CO:R:C:G  084302  SR

          CATEGORY:  Classification

          TARIFF NO.:  737.24

          Jean McGuire
          Area Director of Customs
          New York Seaport
          6 World Trade Center
          New York, New York 10048

          RE:  Decision on Application for Further Review of
                Protest No. 1001-7-010775.

          Dear Sir:

               This protest was filed against your decision in the
          liquidation on May 1, 1987, of entry number 86716233-0, dated
          September 24, 1986, covering a shipment of plastic bottles in the
          shape of humans.

          FACTS:

               The merchandise at issue consists of plastic bottles that
          are shaped like military men.  These bottles, which are imported
          empty, will be used to pack, transport and market shampoo or
          bubble bath.  They are designed as Warrant Officers and Missile
          Specialists.  The head of the person is removed and under that is
          a screw cap that is removed to pour the shampoo or bubble bath
          that is contained in the bottle.

               The bottles were classified under item 737.24, Tariff
          Schedules of the United States (TSUS), which provides for dolls.
          The protestant claims that the merchandise is classifiable under
          item 772.20, TSUS, as containers, of rubber or plastic, with or
          without their closures, chiefly used for the packing,
          transporting or marketing of merchandise.  
















                                         -2-

          ISSUE:

               Whether the merchandise at issue is classifiable as dolls.

          LAW AND ANALYSIS:

               Item 737.24, TSUS, provides for dolls, other, dolls.  The
          protestant claims that the merchandise cannot be a doll because
          it will be disposed of after use, and will not be reused.  The
          protestant claims that it must be classified under item 772.20,
          TSUS, as containers, of rubber or plastics, with or without their
          closures, chiefly used for the packing, transporting, or
          marketing of merchandise, bottles.  However, Schedule 7, Subpart
          E headnote 1, states that the articles described in the
          provisions of this subpart (except parts) shall be classified in
          such provisions, whether or not such articles are more
          specifically provided for elsewhere in the tariff schedules.
          Therefore, if the bottles are classifiable as dolls and as
          bottles, they must be classified as dolls.

               To be classified as a doll, an item is not required to
          provide amusement to children.  As stated in Louis Wolf & Co.,
          Inc. v. United States, 15 Cust. Ct. 156, C.D. 963 (1945), the
          term doll is not confined to articles used as playthings for
          children but includes those for ornamental purposes, for
          advertising purposes which are not used by children and were
          never designed for such use.  The court in Janex Corp. v. United
          States, 80 Cust. Ct. 146, C.D. 4748 (1978), summarized the
          following definitions of a doll as observed by the Customs Court:

                   . . . [W]ell established is the concept that a doll for
               tariff purposes is not confined to playthings for children
               but includes a wide range of other articles including but
               not limited to dolls for ornamentation such as boudoir
               dolls, souvenir or prize dolls, dolls for display or
               advertising purposes, and dolls sold as gag items, bar
               gadgets, adult novelties, etc. Louis Wolf & Co., Inc. v.
               United States, Supra, 15 Cust. Ct. at 157, 158; Gold-Silver
               & Co. v. United States, 35 Cust. Ct. 246, 247, Abs. 59301
               (1955).






















                                         -3-

                  As we have seen, the common meaning of the word "doll"
               encompasses a great variety of merchandise.  Perhaps because
               the variety is so vast, the courts have not been able to
               render a comprehensive definition of the term "doll," nor
               have they been able to " . . . make any all-embracing
               finding as to what is a doll or to hold that all small
               figures are dolls . . . ." [Footnote omitted.]  Nonetheless,
               there does appear to be a certain amount of agreement among
               the lexicographical authorities.  To illustrate, we start
               with the following lexicographic authorities to which
               reference was made in Louis Wolf & Co., Inc. v. United
               States, supra, 15 Cust. Ct. at 160:

                  . . . [W]e are of opinion that the common meaning of that
                  term [doll] is sufficiently comprehensive to include all
                  dolls, whether or not they are toys.  In support of this
                  view, it will be noted that the secondary definition of
                  "doll" as given in Webster's New International
                  Dictionary, 2d Edition, 1936, reads:

                      . . . any similar figure for play or ornament.

               This broader view is further borne out by a comprehensive
               article on the subject of dolls appearing in the
               Encyclopaedia Britannica, 14th Edition, wherein the history,
               development and use of various types of dolls are set forth
               in detail, indicating besides their use as playthings for
               children, wide use in religious rites and other ceremonies
               in many parts of the world from earliest times to the
               present day.

                  More recent lexicographical authorities agree that the
               word "doll' encompasses a broad spectrum of articles which
               are commonly known as dolls.  Thus in Webster's New
               International Dictionary (2d ed., 1953) p. 767, a doll is
               described as:

                    doll . . . 2.  A child's puppet; esp., a toy baby for a
                  child; any similar figure for play or ornament. . . .























                                         -4-

                  In Vol. 9 Encyclopedia Americana ((Internat. ed., 1973)
               p. 255, a doll is described as:

                  Doll, a figurine of a human being.  The word was first
                  used for the child's toy about 1700, possibly as a
                  contraction of Greek eidolon ("idol"), but more probably
                  from the girl's name "Doll" which was short for
                  "Dorothy."  Some authorities now use the word to refer to
                  the child's toy.  Other classes of dolls include
                  religious figurines, objects of art and souvenirs.
                  [Emphasis added.]

                  In Vol. 8 Collier's Encyclopedia (1973 ed. p. 313, a doll
               is described as:

                  Doll, a plaything usually in the form of a baby or child,
                  widely cherished by small girls; also, the ornamental
                  figurines collected by adults as objects of art, curios,
                  keepsakes, or souvenirs.  [Emphasis added.]

               Under these broad definitions of "doll" the bottles at issue
          would be considered dolls.  They are ornamental bottles that have
          the shape of small human figurines that are meant for children to
          play with in the bathtub.  They are used as advertising to entice
          the consumer to purchase the bubble bath inside.  They are not
          merely plastic containers.

          HOLDING:

               The human shaped bottles at issue are classifiable under
          item 737.24, TSUS, which provides for dolls.

               The protest should be denied.  A copy of this decision
          should be attached to the Form 19 Notice of Action to satisfy the
          notice requirement of section 174.30(a), Customs Regulations.

                                             Sincerely,




                                             John Durant, Director
                                             Commercial Rulings Division