HQ 958042: Country of origin for certain luggage styles; 19 CFR 12.130;HQ 957872Dear Mr. Gluck:

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 958042

				June 20, 1995

CLA-2  CO:R:C:T  958042  NLP

CATEGORY: Classification

Daniel J. Gluck, Esq.
Serko & Simon
One World Trade Center- Suite 3371
New York, New York  10048

RE:  Country of origin for certain luggage styles; 19 CFR 12.130;
HQ 957872


Dear Mr. Gluck:

     This is in response to your letter of May 30, 1995, on
behalf of your client, Airway Industries, Inc., in which you
requested a country of origin determination for two styles of
luggage.

FACTS:

     The first piece of luggage is identified as #36430-29,
Upright Pullman, and it measures 29-1/4 inches by 21 inches by 10
inches.  The second piece of luggage is identified as #36430-93,
Upright Carry On, and it measures 22 inches by 14 inches by 8
inches.  The materials comprising the finished pieces of luggage
are manufactured and cut to specific size in Taiwan.  These
components are then shipped to China for assembly and packing
before exportation to the United States.  You also state that the
total cost per unit for the Taiwanese manufacturing process is
$27.24 for the 29 inch Pullman and $18.02 for the Carry On.  The
value of the work performed for each in China is $4.71 and $3.98,
respectively.  The total manufacturing costs are $31.95 and
$22.00, respectively.

     In your letter you state that the specific production and
assembly of both pieces of luggage are identical to that of style
#36430-26, Upright Pullman, which was the subject of HQ 957872,
issued to you, also on behalf of Airways Industries, Inc., on
April 24, 1995.  We have reviewed both the information in your
letter of May 30, 1995, and HQ 957872, and have found the
production and assembly process for the three pieces of luggage
to be the same.  Therefore, we refer you to the fact section of
HQ 957872 for a detailed description of the production and
assembly process of the subject luggage.





ISSUE:

     What is the country of origin of luggage styles #36430-29,
Upright Pullman, and #36430-93, Upright Carry On?

LAW AND ANALYSIS:
     
     Country of origin determinations for textile products are
subject to Section 12.130 of the Customs Regulations (19 CFR
12.130).  Section 12.130(b) provides that a textile product that
is processed in more than one country or territory shall be a
product of that country or territory where it last underwent a
substantial transformation.  A textile or textile product will be
considered to have undergone a substantial transformation if it
has been transformed by means of substantial manufacturing or
processing operations into a new and different article of
commerce. 

     Section 12.130(d) of the Customs Regulations sets forth
criteria for determining whether a substantial transformation of
a textile product has taken place.  This regulation states that
these criteria are not exhaustive; one or any combination of
criteria may be determinative, and additional factors may be
considered.

     Section 12.130(d)(1) of the Customs Regulations states that
a new and different article of commerce will usually result from
a manufacturing or processing operation if there is a change in:

          (i)   Commercial designation or identity. 
          (ii)  Fundamental character or 
          (iii) Commercial use.

     Section 12.130(d)(2) of the Customs Regulations states that
in determining whether merchandise has been subjected to
substantial manufacturing or processing operations, the following
will be considered:

          (i)   The physical change in the material or article as
a result of the                    manufacturing or processing
operations in each foreign territory or country,
          or insular possession of the U.S. 

          (ii)  The time involved in the manufacturing or
processing operations in 
          each foreign territory or country, or insular
possession of the U.S. 

          (iii) The complexity of the manufacturing or processing
operations in 
          each foreign territory or country, or insular
possession of the U.S.

          (iv)  The level or degree of skill and/or technology
required in the                    manufacturing or processing
operations in each foreign territory or country, 
          or insular possession of the U.S.

          (v)   The value added to the article or material in
each foreign territory or               country, or insular
possession of the U.S., compared to its value when               imported into the U.S.

     Section 12.130(e)(1) sets forth manufacturing or processing
operations which will usually constitute a substantial
transformation.  Section 12.130(e)(2) enumerates instances which
will usually not constitute manufacturing or processing
operation.  In Treasury Decision (T.D.) 85-38, published in the
Federal Register on March 5, 1985, (50 FR 8714), the final rule
document which established 19 CFR 12.130, there is a discussion
of how the examples and factors enumerated in the regulations are
intended to operate:

     Examples set forth in 19 CFR 12.130(e) are intended to give
guidance to Customs      officers and other interested parties. 
Obviously, the examples represent clear factual   situations
where the country of origin of the imported merchandise is easily
          ascertainable.  The examples are illustrative of how
Customs, given factual situations  which fall within those
examples, would rule after applying the criteria listed in       12.130(d).  Any factual situation not squarely within those
examples will be decided      by Customs in accordance with the
provisions of 12.130(b) and (d).

     Section 12.130(e) reads as follows:

     Manufacturing or processing operations:  (1) An article or
material usually will be a    product of a particular foreign
territory or country, or insular possession of the U.S.,    when
it has undergone prior to importation into the U.S. in that
foreign territory or     country, or insular possession any of
the following:

          (i) Dyeing of fabric and printing when accompanied by
two or more of the            following finishing operations:
bleaching, shrinking, fulling, napping, decating,           permanent stiffening, weighting, permanent embossing, or
moireing;

          (ii) Spinning fibers into yarn;

          (iii) Weaving, knitting or otherwise forming fabric;

          (iv) Cutting of fabric into parts and the assembly of
those parts into the               completed articles; or

     






     (v)  Substantial assembly by sewing and/or tailoring of all
cut pieces of apparel         articles which have been cut from
fabric in another foreign territory               or country, or
insular possession, into a completed garment (e.g. the complete       assembly and tailoring of all cut pieces of suit-type
jackets, suits, and shirts).

     (2) An article or material usually will not be considered to
be a product of a        particular foreign territory or country,
or insular possession of the U.S. by virtue of    merely having
undergone any of the following:

          (i) Simple combining operations, labeling, pressing,
cleaning or dry cleaning, or       packaging operations or any
combination thereof;

          (ii) Cutting to length or width and hemming or
overlocking fabrics which are           readily identifiable as
being intended for a particular commercial use;

          (iii) Trimming and/or joining by sewing, looping,
linking, or other means of         attaching otherwise completed
knit-to-shape component parts produced in a       single country,
even when accompanied by other processes (e.g. washing,               drying, mending, etc.) normally incident to the
assembly process;

               *         *         *         *         *

     In HQ 957872, dated April 24, 1995, which was issued to you,
also on behalf of Airways Industries, Inc., we dealt with the
country of origin of luggage style #36430-26, 
Upright Pullman.  In that case, the materials comprising the
finished piece of luggage had been manufactured and cut to
specific size in Taiwan.  The issue presented was whether the
assembly and packing of those components in China constituted
substantial transformation.
Based on abundant precedent, we held that the assembly and
packaging of the luggage in China did not constitute a
substantial transformation and, therefore, the country of origin
for the luggage was held to be Taiwan.  As the manufacturing and
assembly operations for the instant styles of luggage are the
same as those performed on style #36430-26, Upright Pullman,  HQ
957872 serves as precedent for the instant case.  Therefore, we
hold that the country of origin for the instant pieces of luggage
is also considered to be Taiwan.

HOLDING:

     The country of origin for luggage style #36430-29 and style
#36430-93 is Taiwan.
The holding set forth above applies only to the specific factual
situation and merchandise identified in the ruling request.  This
position is clearly set forth in section 
177.9(b)(1), Customs Regulations (19 CFR 177.9(b)(1)).  This
section states that a ruling letter is issued on the assumption
that all the information furnished in connection with the ruling
request and incorporated in the ruling letter, either directly,
by reference, or by implication, is accurate and complete in
every material respect. 
     
     Should it subsequently be determined that the information
furnished is not complete and does not comply with 19 CFR
177.9(b)(1), the ruling will be subject to modification or
revocation.  In the event there is a change in the facts
previously furnished, this may affect the determination of
country of origin.  Accordingly, it is recommended that a new
ruling request be submitted in accordance with section 177.2,
Customs Regulations (19 CFR 177.2).


                                   Sincerely,



                                   
                                   John Durant, Director
                                   Commercial Rulings Division