The country of origin of air vents

N304657 July 3, 2019 CLA-2-84:OT:RR:NC:N1:102 CATEGORY: Origin Ms. Paula Connelly Law Offices of Paula M. Connelly 100 Trade Center Suite 660 Woburn, MA 01801 RE: The country of origin of air vents Dear Ms. Connelly: In your letter dated June 5, 2019, on behalf of Taco Comfort Solutions, you requested a country of origin ruling. A detailed description of the manufacturing process was submitted for our review. The items under consideration are part numbers 417-3 and 448-001, referring to air vents used within a radiator system. Each air vent consists of various components that include a venting nipple, a cap, swelling discs, a silicon seal, a valve body, a steel ball, and a spring. The various components are manufactured in Italy or Germany and assembled in the Czech Republic. Once assembled, each air vent functions as a check valve that opens to release air. The assembly process begins with the valve body being positioned for the mounting and placement of a steel ball. Afterwards, a spring is separated or extended and then placed within the opening of the valve body. The valve body with the steel ball and spring are then pushed under a tumbling machine, where it is said that these components are tightly placed and connected. The assembly process continues by inserting eight swelling discs within a venting nipple. A cap is then screwed onto the nipple. This process is followed with a silicon seal being placed onto the venting nipple. The venting nipple, together with a seal, cap and discs, is then screwed onto the valve body that contains a steel ball and spring. The complete valve is labeled and packaged for shipping. Section 304 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1304), provides that, unless excepted, every article of foreign origin imported into the U.S. shall be marked in a conspicuous place as legibly, indelibly, and permanently as the nature of the article (or container) will permit, in such a manner as to indicate to the ultimate purchaser in the U.S. the English name of the country of origin of the article. Congressional intent in enacting 19 U.S.C. 1304 was that the ultimate purchaser should be able to know by an inspection of the marking on the imported goods the country of which the goods is the product. "The evident purpose is to mark the goods so that at the time of purchase the ultimate purchaser may, by knowing where the goods were produced, be able to buy or refuse to buy them, if such marking should influence his will." United States v. Friedlaender & Co., 27 C.C.P.A. 297 at 302 (1940). Part 134, Customs Regulations (19 CFR Part 134), implements the country of origin marking requirements and exceptions of 19 U.S.C. 1304. Section 134.1(b), Customs Regulations (19 CFR 134.1(b)), defines "country of origin" as the country of manufacture, production or growth of any article of foreign origin entering the U.S. Further work or material added to an article in another country must effect a substantial transformation in order to render such other country the “country of origin” within the meaning of this part. The case of U.S. v. Gibson-Thomsen Co., Inc., 27 C.C.P.A. 267 (C.A.D. 98) (1940), provides that an article used in manufacture which results in an article having a name, character, or use differing from that of the constituent article will be considered substantially transformed. Also, in Energizer Battery, Inc. v. United States, 190 F. Supp. 3d 1308 (2016), the Court of International Trade (“CIT”) interpreted the meaning of “substantial transformation” as used in the Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (“TAA”) for purposes of government procurement. In Energizer the court reviewed the “name, character and use” test in determining whether a substantial transformation had occurred in determining the origin of a flashlight, and reviewed various court decisions involving substantial transformation determinations. The court noted, citing Uniroyal, Inc. v. United States, 3 C.I.T. 220, 226, 542 F. Supp. 1026, 1031, aff’d, 702 F.2d 1022 (Fed. Cir. 1983), that when “the post-importation processing consists of assembly, courts have been reluctant to find a change in character, particularly when the imported articles do not undergo a physical change.” Energizer at 1318. In addition, the court noted that “when the end-use was pre-determined at the time of importation, courts have generally not found a change in use.” Energizer at 1319, citing as an example, National Hand Tool Corp. v. United States, 16 C.I.T. 308, 310, aff’d 989 F.2d 1201 (Fed. Cir. 1993). In addition, courts have considered the nature of the assembly, i.e., whether it is a simple assembly or more complex, such that individual parts lose their separate identities and become integral parts of a new article.Based upon the facts presented, the assembly process as described above does not result in a substantial transformation of the components manufactured in either Italy or Germany. The components themselves are not transformed in the Czech Republic into a new and different article of commerce with a name, character, and use distinct from the article exported. Furthermore, it is this office’s opinion that the valve body, which is produced from Italy, provides the essence of the air vent. In view of these facts, the country of origin is Italy. This ruling is being issued under the provisions of Part 177 of the Customs Regulations (19 CFR Part 177). A copy of the ruling or the control number indicated above should be provided with the entry documents filed at the time this merchandise is imported. If you have any questions regarding the ruling, contact National Import Specialist Sandra Martinez at Sandra.Martinez@cbp.dhs.gov. Sincerely, Steven A. Mack Director National Commodity Specialist Division