The country of origin of a fiber optic patch panel and the applicability of certain trade remedies under Section 301

N321495 October 7, 2021 OT:RR:NC:N2:220 CATEGORY: Origin Paula Connelly Sandler, Travis & Rosenberg, P.A. 100 Trade Center, Suite G-100 Woburn, MA 01801 RE: The country of origin of a fiber optic patch panel and the applicability of certain trade remedies under Section 301 Dear Ms. Connelly: In your letter dated September 9, 2021 you requested a country of origin ruling on behalf of your client, Time Interconnect Limited, and request a determination on the applicability of Section 301 remedies pertaining to products of China. The merchandise under consideration is identified as the PPMP Model and the PPLC Model patch panels. The PPMP Model panel is described as a fiber optic patch panel with 16 MTP/MPO adaptors that are mounted onto a pre-cut steel sheet, which you identify as the faceplate. The PPLC Model panel is described as a fiber optic patch panel with 72 LC adaptors that are mounted onto the faceplate. In your letter, you describe four scenarios for production of the PPMP and PPLC patch panels, where the origin of the adapters is the only variable. Both panels are assembled in the same manner, which consists of removing the dust cap for each adaptor, inserting the individual adaptors into a pre-cut hole, securing with two screws, visual inspection, and packaging. In the first scenario, the adaptors will be sourced from the United States, while the faceplate and the fasteners are sourced from China. In China, the adaptors are secured to the faceplate and the panel is packaged for export. In the second scenario, the adaptors will be sourced from Japan, while the faceplate and the fasteners are sourced from China. In China, the adaptors are secured to the faceplate and the panel is packaged for export. In the third scenario, the adaptors will be sourced from Taiwan, while the faceplate and the fasteners are sourced from China. In China, the adaptors are secured to the faceplate and the panel is packaged for export. In the fourth scenario, the adaptors will be sourced from Thailand, while the faceplate and the fasteners are sourced from China. In China, the adaptors are secured to the faceplate and the panel is packaged for export. The marking statute, section 304, Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1304), provides that, unless excepted, every article of foreign origin (or its container) imported into the U.S. shall be marked in a conspicuous place as legibly, indelibly and permanently as the nature of the article (or its 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. The “country of origin” is defined in 19 CFR 134.1(b) 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.” The test for determining whether a substantial transformation will occur is whether an article emerges from a process with a new name, character or use, different from that possessed by the article prior to processing. See Texas Instruments Inc. v. United States, 69 C.C.P.A. 151 (1982). This determination is based on the totality of the evidence. See National Hand Tool Corp. v. United States, 16 C.I.T. 308 (1992), aff’d, 989 F.2d 1201 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Based upon the facts presented and the pertinent authorities, it is the opinion of this office that the assembly process for the PPMP Model and the PPLC Model patch panels, as described above, does not result in a substantial transformation of the fiber optic adaptors into a new and different article of commerce with a name, character, and use distinct from the individual components. In our view, attaching connectors onto a steel sheet is a basic assembly operation, and one that does not transform the connectors into something other than a fiber optic connector. Consequently, the patch panels described in the first scenario are considered products of the United States and are not subject to the additional duties applicable to products of China under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, upon importation into the United States. The patch panels described in the second scenario are considered products of Japan and are not subject to the additional duties applicable to products of China under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, upon importation into the United States. The patch panels described in the third scenario are considered products of Taiwan and are not subject to the additional duties applicable to products of China under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, upon importation into the United States. The patch panels described in the fourth scenario are considered products of Thailand and are not subject to the additional duties applicable to products of China under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, upon importation into the United States. Please note that 19 C.F.R. § 177.9(b)(1) provides that “[e]ach ruling letter is issued on the assumption that all of the information furnished in connection with the ruling request and incorporated in the ruling letter, either directly, by reference, or by implication, is accurate and complete in every material respect. The application of a ruling letter by a Customs Service field office to the transaction to which it is purported to relate is subject to the verification of the facts incorporated in the ruling letter, a comparison of the transaction described therein to the actual transaction, and the satisfaction of any conditions on which the ruling was based.” 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 Karl Moosbrugger at karl.moosbrugger@cbp.dhs.gov. Sincerely, Steven A. Mack Director National Commodity Specialist Division