CLA-2 CO:R:C:G 085939 TLS
District Director
U.S. Customs Service
477 Michigan Avenue
Detroit, Michigan 48226-2568
RE: Request for further review of protests 3801-9-001450 and
3801-9-001451 concerning the classification of jack handles
Dear District Director:
The file submitted to Headquarters for review of the above-
mentioned protests concern the proper classification of jack
handles under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
Annotated (HTSUSA). The entries involved in protest 3801-9-
001451 were liquidated on January 20 and 27, 1989; Form 19, filed
on March 21, 1989, did not request further review due to failure
to answer question 7. We will consider the importer's letter of
May 17, 1989 a request for further review, but we cannot honor
the importer's request with regards to 3801-9-001451 because it
was not filed in a timely fashion. See 19
U.S.C.A. 1514(c)(2). See also Customs Regulations 174.12 and
174.25. Accordingly, our reply is applicable only to entry 441-
XXXXXXXXX involved in protest 3801-9-001450.
FACTS:
The importations under protest consist of an entire
automotive jack, including the subject jack handles. It appears
that one end of the jack handles is flattened so that it can be
used to pry off the wheel cover on an automobile wheel. The
other end is molded into a lug-shaped adaptor and can be used to
loosen the lug nuts which hold the wheel to the hub of the
automobile. In addition to performing these functions, the
handle is inserted into an opening in the body of the jack and
used as a lever to manually raise the jack in order to raise the
vehicle off the ground, allowing for a tire change.
ISSUE:
Are the jack handles properly classifiable separate from the
jacks or should they be classified together as an entire unit?
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
In determining the proper classification of the jack handles
under HTSUSA, we must refer to the terms of the headings and any
relative section or chapter notes, according to General Rule of
Interpretation (GRI) 1, HTSUSA. Heading 8204 covers wrenches,
among other things. The port of Detroit has classified the
subject merchandise under 8204, concluding that the primary
function of these jack handles is to act as a wrench because they
are used to loosen and tighten the lug nuts on the wheels of an
automobile. The port of Detroit found that the end of the jack
handles that function as a prying mechanism and the handles'
function as a lever were secondary in use to their function as a
wrench. In doing so, the port of Detroit relied upon Customs
ruling letter HQ 080724, which ruled that the jack handle in that
case was classifiable under 648.97, TSUS, the equivalent of
HTSUSA heading 8204. The facts in the present case are
distinguishable from those of HQ 080724, however.
These jack handles are without question used as a lever for
the jack itself to raise an automobile off the ground to allow
for removal of a wheel. These handles are essential to that
function; without the handles, the jack cannot operate as a lift.
The jack handles in this case are an integral part of the entire
jack unit. In HQ 080724, the jack handle was not used with the
jack in any capacity nor was it used to perform any independent
jacking function.
Inasmuch as the jack handles are marketed and sold as an
integral part of an entire unit, we find that we must classify
them with the unit. The fact that the handles are not
permanently attached to the jack or that the handles can also
function as pry bars or wrenches will not require that they be
classified separately from the main part of the unit. Therefore,
we find the jack handles to be properly classifiable with the
jacks as an entire unit under heading 8425.
HOLDING:
The jack handles are classified with the jacks they are sold
with as entire units under subheading 8425.49.00, HTSUSA, as
jacks.
To the extent that these articles are imported from Canada,
they are eligible for duty-free entry under the Automotive
Products Trade Act, provided they meet all other requirements of
General Headnote 3(c)(iii)(A) of HTSUSA. Protest 3801-9-001450
should be allowed only with respect to entry 441-XXXXXXXXX; all
other entries should be denied because the protest was not timely
filed with respect to those entries. Inasmuch as request for
further review of protest 3801-9-1451 was not filed in a timely
fashion, it should be denied in full. A copy of this decision
should be attached to the form 19, Notice of Action.
Sincerely,
John Durant, Director