The country of origin of optical lenses

N311111 April 17, 2020 CLA-2-90:OT:RR:NC:N2:212 CATEGORY: Origin Amanda Levitt Sandler, Travis & Rosenberg, P.A. 551 Fifth Avenue, Suite 1100 New York, NY 10176 RE: The country of origin of optical lenses Dear Ms. Levitt: In your letter dated April 7, 2020, you requested a country of origin ruling on behalf of your client, Kyocera International, Inc. The merchandise under consideration, identified by part number 111666, is described as glass optical lenses. You state that these lenses are designed to be incorporated into a variety of end uses included riflescopes, telescopes, imaging, cameras, among others. You further state that the subject lenses are considered optically worked as they are capable of creating certain optical effects including magnification, reduction, and filtering. In your request, you explain that the manufacturing process begins with the creation of glass blanks in Germany. These glass blanks are roughly cut to the desired lens shape and are opaque, with no ability to affect light. The blanks are then sent to Taiwan where they are inspected and the optical working process is completed. This process begins by grinding and polishing the blanks in multiple steps, with each step creating another level of optical properties. The lens elements are then centered and a unique coating is added that improves the optical qualities. The completed lenses are then cleaned and packaged for shipment to the United States. The “country of origin” is defined in 19 CFR 134.1(b), in pertinent part, as “the country of manufacture, production, or growth of any article of foreign origin entering the United States. 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.” For tariff purposes, the courts have held that a substantial transformation occurs when an article emerges from a process with a new name, character or use different from that possessed by the article prior to processing. United States v. Gibson-Thomsen Co., Inc., 27 CCPA 267, C.A.D. 98 (1940); National Hand Tool Corp. v. United States, 16 CIT 308 (1992), aff’d, 989 F. 2d 1201 (Fed. Cir. 1993); Anheuser Busch Brewing Association v. The United States, 207 U.S. 556 (1908) and Uniroyal Inc. v. United States, 542 F. Supp. 1026 (1982). Further, 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, “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). Furthermore, 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. With regard to the country of origin of the subject lenses, it is the opinion of this office that the glass blanks originating in Germany are substantially transformed by the operations performed in Taiwan. The optical working procedures add the functional capabilities to the lenses and transform the blanks into a new and different article of commerce with a name, character, and use distinct from the imported articles. Based upon the facts presented and the relevant authorities, it is our opinion that the country of origin of the optical lenses, part number 111666, is Taiwan. This ruling is being issued under the provisions of Part 177 of the Customs Regulations (19 C.F.R. 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 Luke LePage at luke.lepage@cbp.dhs.gov. Sincerely, Steven A. Mack Director National Commodity Specialist Division