Request for a Ruling on a table bunting

HQ 960301 April 10, 1997 CLA-2 RR:TC:TE 960301 CAB CATEGORY: Classification Laura Denny CBT International, Inc. 110 West Ocean Blvd., Suite 728 Long Beach, CA 90802 RE: Request for a Ruling on a table bunting Dear Ms. Denny: This is in response to your inquiry of February 12, 1997, on behalf of Vail Wire & Steel Fabricating, Inc., requesting a tariff classification, country of origin and marking ruling on a table bunting. Your inquiry does not comply with the regulatory requirements of section 177.2(b)(5), Customs Regulations, (19 CFR 177.2(b)(5)). This regulation states the following: Prior or current transactions. Each request for a ruling must state whether, to the knowledge of the person submitting the request, the same transaction, or one identical to it, has ever been considered, or is currently being considered by any Customs Service office or whether, to the knowledge of the person submitting the request, the issues involved have ever been considered, or are currently being considered, by the United States Court of International Trade, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, or any court of appeal therefrom. Where the transaction described in the ruling request is but one of a series of similar and related transactions, that fact must also be stated. Your submission failed to set forth that you had requested a tariff classification, country of origin and marking ruling on behalf of Vail Wire & Steel Fabricating, Inc. on an almost identical table bunting in a letter to Customs on December 18, 1996. In HQ 960178, dated February 10, 1997, (copy enclosed), Customs issued to you a ruling which addressed the tariff classification, country of origin and marking of the table bunting therein. As Customs has already addressed your inquiry concerning substantially identical merchandise in HQ 960178 and since you have failed to follow proper regulatory procedures by not stating in your submission that Customs had already considered identical issues, Customs will refrain from issuing a ruling in this instance pursuant to sections 177.2(b)(5) and 177.7(a), Customs Regulations, (19 CFR  177.2(b)(5), 177.7(a)). Accordingly, Customs is administratively closing out the file concerning this matter. If you believe HQ 960178 is wrong you may appeal that ruling to this office. However, you should clearly articulate the reasons you believe HQ 960178 is in error and support that belief with legal arguments in support of your position. In the alternative, you may import the merchandise, provide the port with a copy of HQ 960178, and protest the liquidation in accordance with the procedures set forth in Part 174, Custom Regulations, (19 CFR Part 174). As with an appeal, you should clearly articulate in the protest, the reasons for your belief that HQ 960178 is wrong and support your position with legal arguments. If you have any further questions, please contact a member of my staff, Cathy Braxton, at (202) 482-7048. Sincerely, John Durant, Director Tariff Classification Appeals Division