Newly Released CBP HQ Rulings on Oct. 11
The Customs Rulings Online Search System (CROSS) was updated Oct. 11 with the following headquarters rulings (ruling revocations and modifications will be detailed elsewhere in a separate article as they are announced in the Customs Bulletin):
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
H326633: Request for Reconsideration of HQ H314296; Related Parties; Unrelated final customer; Transaction Value
| Ruling: The merchandise should be appraised using transaction value based on the price paid or payable by the final U.S. customer. HQ H314296, dated Aug. 12, 2021, is affirmed. |
| Issue: Whether the merchandise can be appraised under transaction value based on the price paid or payable by the U.S. importer or under the computed or fallback appraisement method. |
| Item: Laser cutting machines |
| Reason: The merchandise can be appraised by using the transaction value based on the price paid by the unrelated final U.S. customer. Therefore, there is no need to go down the hierarchy of valuation methods. |
| Ruling Date: Sept. 20, 2022 |
H327067: Modification of HQ H316892; Internal Advice Request; Transaction Value; Multi-Tiered Transaction
| Ruling: The imported goods may be appraised under transaction value based on the price actually paid or payable for the merchandise by the U.S. importer. |
| Issue: Whether the “first sale” transaction between each of the foreign manufacturers and the middleman may be used to determine the transaction value of the imported merchandise. |
| Items: Metal, woodworking, and industrial tools |
| Reason: Sales between foreign manufacturers and the middleman are presumed to be at arm’s length. Merchandise was clearly destined for the U.S. at the time of the sale between the manufacturers and the middleman. In the absence of a passage of title and risk of loss to the middleman, there was no bona fide “first sale” and the merchandise may not be appraised based on the price paid by the middleman. Therefore, the sale between the U.S. importer and the unrelated foreign manufacturers was the only sale that occurred. |
| Ruling Date: Sept 1, 2022 |
H326291: Ruling Request; U.S. International Trade Commission; Limited Exclusion Order; Investigation No. 337-TA-1191; Certain Audio Players and Controllers, Components Thereof, And Products Containing the Same
| Ruling: Google has met the option provided in HQ H324813 that the Device Utility Application (DUA) addressed in the ruling can no longer be used with the “relevant articles at issue." Google has complied with HQ H324813 and that the articles at issue are not subject to exclusion from entry as long as Google continues to refrain from making the DUA available, consistent with this ruling, or until the DUA is determined not to infringe the relevant claims of the asserted patents. |
| Issue: Whether Google’s undisputed removal of the DUA from its U.S. Play Store satisfies one of the options provided in HQ H324813 that would permit Google to enter future shipments of the articles at issue in that ruling. |
| Item: N/A |
| Reason: HQ H324813 required that Google “disable or render inoperable” the DUA addressed in the ruling, such that it can no longer be used with the relevant articles at issue. Google's removal of the DUA from its U.S. Play Store "deprived customers of the ability to download it for future use on newly imported Google controllers," which meets the definition of "disable." |
| Ruling Date: Aug. 5, 2022 |