GoPro Housings Are 'Cases,' Not 'Parts,' Government Argues at CIT
Eight models of GoPro Hero camera housings are properly classified as camera cases under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 4202 and not parts, the government said in a Dec. 9 motion at the Court of International Trade. The brief opposed GoPro's Aug. 5 motion for summary judgment, in which the company argued the housings were duty-free parts under heading 8529 because the cameras cannot fulfill their primary hands-free function without them (see 2208080041). DOJ has asked the court to deny GoPro's motion and grant its own, which would dismiss the case (GoPro v. United States, CIT #20-00176).
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!
Heading 4202 lists camera cases and "similar containers" by name, DOJ said. GoPro also misinterpreted U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit precedent that each of the heading 4202 characteristics of storage, transport, protection and organization must be met, and the company incorrectly added a further nonexistent requirement that these characteristics must occur while the camera is not in functional use, DOJ said. The government, in rebutting GoPro's preferred classification, pointed to examples of camera cases, such as the 35mm camera case that partially encloses the camera while in use.
Without explicit limitation or evidence of legislative intent, the tariff headings include all forms of the named items, even improved forms, DOJ said. The housings are an improved form of camera case rather than a different article because they are not "substantially in excess" of examples included in the tariff language, DOJ said.