HQ 953349: Request for reconsideration of Protest No. 1303-92-100322 and Protest No. 1303-92-100306; "dormshirts"; San Francisco Newspaper Printing Co.

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 953349

                        February 22, 1993

CLA-2  CO:R:C:T  953349  jb

CATEGORY:  Classification

TARIFF NO.:  6108.31.0010

Beth C. Brotman, Esq.
Siegel, Mandell & Davidson, P.C.
One Astor Plaza
1515 Broadway, 43rd Fl.
New York, NY 10036

RE:  Request for reconsideration of Protest No. 1303-92-100322
     and Protest No. 1303-92-100306; "dormshirts"; San Francisco
     Newspaper Printing Co.

Dear Ms. Brotman:

     This is in response to your letter dated January 29, 1993,
on behalf of your client, McCrory Stores, in which you requested
reconsideration of Protest No. 1303-92-100322 and Protest No.
1303-92-100306.

FACTS:

     Protest No. 1303-92-100322 and Protest No. 1303-92-100306
were denied by the District Director of Customs in Baltimore. 
The subject protests, which had been filed to challenge the
classification of garments known as "dormshirts", claimed that
the merchandise was properly classified as nightwear in
subheading 6108.31.0010, HTSUSA, rather than as pullovers in
subheading 6110.20.2075, HTSUSA.  The rationale of the protests
was based on Headquarters Ruling (HQ) 951628, dated 
August 12, 1992, which classified the dormshirts as nightwear in
heading 6108, HTSUSA.

     The protests were denied on the ground that as the involved
entries were filed prior to the date of the issuance of 
HQ 951628, the ruling was inapplicable to said entries.

     In your letter of January 29, 1993, you requested that
formal denial of Protest No. 1303-92-100322 and Protest No.
1303-92-100306 be withheld pending reconsideration.  Based on
your submissions it appears that the denial of the protest
decisions were mailed by the Baltimore District on 
January 20, 1993 and January 15, 1993, respectively. 

ISSUE:

     Whether Customs may delay the effect of a protest once the
decision has been mailed to the protestant?

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

     Customs has no authority to exercise jurisdiction over a
protest after it has been denied.  San Francisco Newspaper
Printing Co. v. United States, 620 F. Supp. 738, 740 (1985); 
9 CIT 517 (1985).  Since the request for reconsideration was not
received until after January 20, 1993, that is, after the
protests were denied, this office did not have the opportunity to
act on your request.  Accordingly, we are unable to grant your
request for reconsideration.

HOLDING:

     Pursuant to the above, Customs will not intercede once the
protests are denied.



                           Sincerely,




                           John Durant, Director
                           Commercial Rulings Division