Grk Canada, Ltd. v. United States
Opinion
The United States appeals from a final judgment of the United States Court of *1343 International Trade granting GRK Canada, Ltd.'s motion for summary judgment that various screws imported by GRK were properly classified as "self-tapping screws" under subheading 7318.14.10 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States. Because the Court of International Trade properly classified GRK's imported screws, we affirm.
BACKGROUND
This matter returns to the court following remand to the Court of International Trade.
GRK Can., Ltd. v. United States
("
GRK IV
"),
Between January 2008 and August 2008, GRK imported three types of screw fasteners into the United States.
GRK IV
,
Upon GRK's importation of the subject screws, United States Customs and Border Protection ("Customs") classified the screws as "other wood screws" under subheading 7318.12.00 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States ("HTSUS"),
2
subject to an import duty of 12.5%
ad valorem
.
GRK appealed Customs' decision to the Court of International Trade, which granted summary judgment in GRK's favor. The court determined, as
eo nomine
provisions that describe all forms of an article by a specific name, the subheadings for "other wood screws" and "self-tapping screws" cannot be interpreted based on use "[a]bsent limiting language or contrary legislative intent."
GRK I
,
On appeal, we held that the Court of International Trade erred in "refus[ing] to consider the use of the screws at any step of determining the classification of the subject articles at issue."
GRK II
,
On remand, the Court of International Trade ordered pretrial discovery limited to the issues of "intended use," "principal use," and "actual use" of GRK's imported screws.
GRK IV
,
The Court of International Trade undertook a new classification analysis. As a threshold determination on whether to apply the GRIs or the U.S. Additional Rules of Interpretation ("ARIs"),
4
the court determined that neither tariff term "other wood screws" nor "self-tapping screws" were so controlled by use such that the court would be required to consult the ARIs.
Based on the HTSUS headings, the section and chapter notes, the explanatory notes, the available lexico-graphic sources, and its review of intended use, the court concluded that (1) the common and commercial meaning of "other wood screw" is "a screw that forms its own thread by compressing surrounding material designed to fasten wood to wood or other fibrous material," and (2) the common and commercial meaning of "self-tapping screw" is a "specially hardened screw, that meets minimum torsional strength requirements, that can cut away material to form a mating thread in non-fibrous material, and is designed to fasten non-fibrous materials, such as metal, to either fibrous or non-fibrous materials."
The court then turned to whether GRK's imported screws are properly classified as "other wood screws" or as "self-tapping screws" under the court's constructions.
The Government appeals. We have jurisdiction under
STANDARD OF REVIEW
We review de novo the grant of summary judgment by the Court of International Trade.
Drygel, Inc. v. United States
,
We accord deference to Customs' classification rulings relative to the rulings' "power to persuade."
United States v. Mead Corp.
,
DISCUSSION
The Government raises two issues on appeal. First, it argues that Court of International Trade erred in defining the HTSUS tariff terms "other wood screws" and "self-tapping screws" by failing to consider physical characteristics that make them suitable for inserting and anchoring into wood or non-resilient materials, respectively. Second, should we find the Court of International Trade erred in its construction of the tariff terms, the Government contends that this error caused the court to misclassify GRK's screws as "self-tapping screws" instead of "other wood screws." Because we agree with the Court of International Trade's constructions of the common and commercial meanings for "other wood screws" and "self-tapping screws," we affirm.
A. HTSUS CLASSIFICATION FRAMEWORK
To construe a tariff provision, we apply the GRIs, which are part of the HTSUS, in numerical order.
Kahrs
,
Here, where there is no factual dispute over the structure, design, or use of GRK's imported screws, we need only determine the proper meaning and scope of the relevant HTSUS provisions.
B. GRK'S SCREWS ARE SELF-TAPPING SCREWS
The Government argues that the common and commercial meaning of "other wood screw" is "a screw that is designed to be inserted and/or anchored into wood and other resilient materials." Appellant's Br. 24-25. Conversely, the Government contends that the common and commercial meaning of "self-tapping screws" are screws exclusively "designed for use in non-wood applications such as fastening concrete, marble, or metal to metal." Id. at 28-29. The Government thus avers that because GRK's screws are designed for use in wood and resilient materials, they should be classified as "other wood screws" under HTSUS 7318.12, not as "self-tapping screws" under HTSUS 7318.14. Id. at 29.
We note that the parties do not dispute that the HTSUS tariff terms at issue are
eo nomine
provisions. An
eo nomine
provision is one that names a specific product or describes by name the subject merchandise.
See
Clarendon Mktg., Inc. v. United States
,
Despite the Government's recognition that the disputed terms are eo nomine provisions, it asks the court to define the common and commercial meaning of "wood screw" and "self-tapping screw" based on what material the screw is intended to be anchored into. Thus, the Government argues that the use of GRK's screws controls our interpretation of the tariff provisions. In GRK II , we instructed the Court of International Trade to consider use of the screws in interpreting the HTSUS tariff provisions, but the Government now seeks to elevate use as the sole consideration. We decline to do so. Adopting the Government's position would all but abrogate the foundational tenet of tariff classification that eo nomine provisions are distinct from use provisions and do not depend on either principal or actual use of the imported merchandise. See Aromont , 671 F.3d at 1312.
We also conclude that the Government's proposed interpretation of "other wood screws" to mean "a screw that is designed to be inserted or anchored into wood and other resilient materials" is not borne out by the record. The Government conceded during oral argument that "there is not an explicit reference to the term anchoring" in any of the record material aside from one dictionary definition that uses the term "insertion" and the Government's proffered expert testimony. Oral *1348 Arg. at 3:01-5:10, http://oralarguments.cafc.uscourts.gov/default.aspx?fl=2016-2623.mp3. As explained below, the Government's proposed interpretations of the disputed tariff terms are unsupported by the record.
The Government supports its argument by first looking to the Glossary of Terms published by the American National Standards Institute ("ANSI") and the American Society of Mechanical Engineers ("ASME"). We have recognized ANSI's and ASME's expertise in the field of fasteners.
Rocknel Fastener, Inc. v. United States
,
3.1.2.30 wood screw : a thread forming screw having a slotted or recessed head, gimlet point, and a sharp crested, coarse pitch thread, and generally available with flat, oval and round head styles. It is designed to produce a mating thread when assembled into wood or other resilient materials.
3.1.2.22 tapping screw : has a slotted, recessed, or wrenching head and is designed to form or cut a mating thread in one or more of the parts to be assembled.
J.A. 770, 772. According to the Government, the screws' intended purpose is the distinguishing feature because "wood screws are those tapping screws that are designed to be used and anchored in wood and other resilient materials." Appellant's Br. 22. But the Government does not establish what design characteristics of tapping screws or wood screws would result in the different applications. The Government conceded at oral argument that a self-tapping screw may be used in wood in some limited circumstances, but such use would not be "ideal." Oral Arg. 6:04-6:17.
The subheadings' explanatory notes also do not lend strong support to the Government's position that self-tapping screws are limited to use in non-resilient materials. The explanatory notes for fasteners under heading 7318 do not consider "insertion" or "anchoring" as the distinguishing feature between self-tapping and wood screws, but provide the following clarification:
Screws for wood differ from bolts and screws for metal in that they are tapered and pointed, and they have a steeper cutting thread since they have to bite their own way into the material. Further, wood screws almost always have slotted or recessed heads and they are never used with nuts.
[S]elf-tapping (Parker) screws ... resemble wood screws in that they have a slotted head and a cutting thread and are pointed or tapered at the end. They can therefore cut their own passage into thin sheets of metal, marble, slate, plastics, etc.
J.A. 812. As with the ANSI/ASME Standard, nothing in the explanatory notes limits the material that self-tapping screws can be anchored into. Rather, the explanatory notes define self-tapping screws based on the physical features that permit the screws to cut mating threads into certain materials like metal, marble, slate, and plastics.
The Government's reliance on various dictionary definitions is unavailing, as
*1349
these definitions do not conclusively identify the anchoring material as the key distinction between wood screws and self-tapping screws. To advance its argument that the anchoring material controls our interpretation of the tariff terms, the Government selects a definition of "wood screw," which defines the screw as a "pointed metal screw formed with a sharp thread of comparatively co[a]rse pitch for insertion in wood."
GRK IV
,
The Government also relies on a Court of Customs and Patent Appeals case,
Trans-Atlantic Co. v. United States
,
In any event,
Trans-Atlantic
has little bearing on our interpretation of "other wood screws" under the HTSUS. We noted in
JVC Co. of America v. United States
that the prior TSUS cases may be considered instructive in interpreting HTSUS headings when the nomenclature at issue has not changed.
Lastly, we see no error in and decline to depart from the Court of International
*1350
Trade's interpretation of the common and commercial meanings of "other wood screws" under HTSUS 7318.12 and "self-tapping screws" under HTSUS 7318.14. The court properly applied the GRIs and consulted the explanatory notes, dictionary definitions, and expert testimony before reaching its constructions.
GRK IV
,
CONCLUSION
We decline to accept the Government's invitation to elevate the role of use in our interpretation of the eo nomine provisions at issue here. On remand, the Court of International Trade complied with this court's command in GRK II that it consider "use" in its review of the scope of the disputed HTSUS terms. Because the Court of International Trade properly applied the GRIs and appropriately considered the screws' intended use in crafting its interpretations of the eo nomine provisions of "other wood screws" and "self-tapping screws," we affirm the judgment of the Court of International Trade that GRK's three imported screws are properly classified as "self-tapping screws" under HTSUS 7318.14.10.
AFFIRMED
COSTS
No costs.
The RT and Fin/Trim Head Screws are both varieties of GRK's Trim Head screws, and are collectively referred to as Trim Head screws in the Court of International Trade's decision.
All references to the HTSUS refer to the governing provision determined by the date of importation, here the 2008 version.
See
LeMans Corp. v. United States
,
The parties do not contest the eight-digit level classification of whether GRK's "self-tapping screws" fall under subheading 7318.14.10 for "self-tapping screws having shanks or threads with a diameter of less than 6 mm," and not under subheading 7318.14.50 for "self-tapping screws having shanks or threads with a diameter of 6 mm or more."
The ARIs provide the interpretative framework for tariff provisions defined by use.
See, e.g.
,
Aromont USA, Inc. v. United States
,
The Government argues that the subheading for another type of screw, "coach screws" under subheading 7318.11, indicates that the anchoring material is the critical distinction between wood screws and self-tapping screws. The Government does not argue that GRK's screws fall within subheading 7318.11. Rather, the Government asks us to apply GRI 6, which provides that "the classification of goods in the subheadings of a heading shall be determined according to the terms of those subheadings and any related subheading notes and,
mutatis mutandis
, to the above rules on the understanding that only subheadings at the same level are comparable." As we find that the Court of International Trade's application of GRI 1 is sufficient to define the
eo nomine
provisions at issue at the sixth-digit level, we need not reach GRI 6.
Schlumberger
,
Reference
- Full Case Name
- GRK CANADA, LTD., Plaintiff-Appellee v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellant
- Status
- Published