The country of origin of disposable pipets with ink-printed identifiers for Section 301 and marking purposes

N348955 June 3, 2025 OT:RR:NC:N1:104 CATEGORY: Origin Glenn Page Foreign Trade Zone Solutions LLC P.O. Box 483 Greenland, NH 03840 RE: The country of origin of disposable pipets with ink-printed identifiers for Section 301 and marking purposes Dear Mr. Page: In your letter dated May 13, 2025, on behalf of your client, Integra Biosciences Corp., you requested a country of origin ruling for Integra serological disposable pipets. The products in question are clear, disposable polystyrene serological pipets that will be fully manufactured in China and imported into the U.S. The Chinese manufacturing process involves the extrusion and forming of the pipet, printing graduation lines on the pipet, and the insertion of a filter. Additionally, a colored fluorescent ink will be shipped from Germany to China where it will be printed onto the very top portion of the pipet that connects to a pipet controller device. The German-origin ink is applied using a printing mechanism similar to that used for printing the graduation lines. The pipet’s ink identifier color represents its liquid volume. You state that the imported pipets will be used in conjunction with a handheld pipet controller referred to as the PIPETBOY Genius that will be imported separately into the U.S. from Switzerland. The PIPETBOY Genius, whose principal function is to aspirate and dispense liquid into a pipet for lab research, is also capable of reading or detecting the identifier ink color, enabling it to operate in auto repeat mode and prevent the controller from overfilling the pipet. In your submission, you assert that the country of origin of the pipet should be Germany, where the ink for the identifier is produced. You claim that the PIPETBOY Genius controller would not be able to fully function as intended without using the ink identifier pipet, meaning it could not automatically detect the pipet’s volume and prevent overfilling. 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 United States 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 United States, 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.” See United States v. Friedlander & Co., 27 C.C.P.A. 297, 302 (1940). Part 134 of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) Regulations (19 CFR 134) implements the country of origin marking requirements and exceptions of 19 U.S.C. 1304. Section 134.1(b), CBP 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 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 the marking laws and regulations. A substantial transformation occurs when, as a result of manufacturing process, a new and different article emerges, having a distinct name, character or use, which is different from that originally possessed by the article or material before being subjected to the manufacturing process. See United States v. Gibson-Thomsen Co., Inc., 27 C.C.P.A. 267 (C.A.D. 98) (1940). We disagree that the imported pipet’s origin is dictated by the ink identifier. The pipet’s principal function and use, which is to transfer graduated amounts of liquid from one container to another, is fully established upon its manufacture in China. The pipet’s name, character, and use is not changed by the addition of the German color ink identifier. While the ink identifier enhances the functionality of the PIPETBOY Genius controller, you confirmed that such controller can be used in manual mode without the repeat dispense function and can also be used with any serological pipet. Furthermore, information provided on Integra’s website suggests that the imported serological pipets can be used with pipet controllers that lack color ink detectors. In any case, while the pipet’s ink identifier enhances the functionality of certain pipet controllers, we disagree that the ink constitutes the essential character of the imported pipet. In your submission, you cite New York Ruling Letter N345964 dated Mar. 7, 2025, as support for your claim that the country of origin of pipet is dictated by ink identifier component. That ruling concerned a basic ball point pen consisting of an ink cartridge manufactured in Italy from German ink, a ballpoint tip from India, and a U.S.-produced ink cartridge tube. CBP determined that the country in which the ink cartridge was created, Italy, resulted in a substantial transformation of the pen components, including the ink barrel body and plunger. However, unlike the Italian-produced ink cartridge in N345964, which was a tube filled with writing ink that allowed the pen to perform its principal function (i.e., writing), the ink identifier on Integra pipets at best enhances their versatility when used with a color-detecting pipet controller. However, the printed ink identifier does not impart the pipet’s essential character and function, which is to transfer liquids. Because the addition of the German ink identifier does not substantially transform the Integra serological pipet, the country of origin of the pipet for Section 301 and marking purposes will be China, where it is manufactured and assembled. The holding set forth above applies only to the specific factual situation and merchandise description as identified in the ruling request. This position is clearly set forth in Title 19, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Section 177.9(b)(1). This section states that a ruling letter is issued on the assumption that all of the information furnished in the ruling letter, whether directly, by reference, or by implication, is accurate and complete in every material respect. In the event that the facts are modified in any way, or if the goods do not conform to these facts at time of importation, you should bring this to the attention of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and submit a request for a new ruling in accordance with 19 CFR 177.2. Additionally, we note that the material facts described in the foregoing ruling may be subject to periodic verification by CBP. This ruling is being issued under the provisions of Part 177 of the Customs and Border Protection 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, please contact National Import Specialist Arthur Purcell at arthur.purcell@cbp.dhs.gov. Sincerely, (for) Steven A. Mack Director National Commodity Specialist Division