CLA-2 CO:R:C:M 089876 DWS
District Director
U.S. Customs Service
127 North Water Street
Ogdensburg, NY 13669
RE: Blood Lancets; Protest No. 0712-91-000426; NY 850301
Dear Sir:
This is our decision on Application for Further Review of
Protest No. 0712-91-000426, dated April 10, 1991, concerning your
action in classifying and assessing duty on blood lancets under
the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States Annotated
(HTSUSA).
FACTS:
The subject disposable lancet is a pointed, metal shaft
embedded in a plastic handle. A flat cap is provided for safe
disposal. While the shape of the lancet may look very similar to
a common needle, it is also very different. The shaft of the
lancet is round, the point is not. Three facets have been cut on
the point, thus creating secondary edges in addition to the two
standard side edges. The lancet is designed to make an incision
that is small in depth but at the same time to cut as many blood
vessels as possible to draw a sufficient amount of blood for
testing. The lancet is almost exclusively used by diabetic
patients for puncturing the skin to draw blood for blood-sugar
analysis.
ISSUE:
What is the proper classification of blood lancets under the
HTSUSA?
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
Classification of merchandise under the HTSUSA is in
accordance with the General Rules of Interpretation (GRI's),
taken in order. GRI 1 provides that classification is determined
according to the terms of the headings and any relative section
or chapter notes.
The merchandise was entered under subheading 9018.39.00,
HTSUSA, which provides for: "[s]yringes, needles, catheters,
cannulae and the like: [o]ther." However, the merchandise was
liquidated under subheading 9018.90.80, HTSUSA, which provides
for: "[i]nstruments and appliances used in medical, surgical,
dental or veterinary sciences: [o]ther instruments and appliances
and parts and accessories thereof: [o]ther: [o]ther."
This identical issue was ruled upon in HQ 089874, dated
September 19, 1991, in which a similar lancet was classified
under subheading 9018.39.00, HTSUSA. In that ruling, it was
stated that "[e]ven though counsel is incorrect in stating that
lancets are needles, he is correct in stating that lancets are
sufficiently 'like' needles for tariff classification purposes."
In a telephone conversation with Dr. Joyce L. Hayman, of the
Diabetes Treatment Center at Georgetown University Hospital,
Washington, D.C., concerning the merchandise in HQ 089874, she
stated that "it is accepted in the medical profession that
lancets are 'like' needles."
In support of your contention that the lancet is
classifiable under subheading 9018.90.80, HTSUSA, you have cited
NY 850301, dated March 26, 1991. In that case, a blood sampling
lancet was classified under subheading 9018.90.80, HTSUSA. The
merchandise which was the subject of NY 850301 is very similar to
the subject lancet, except the lancet was imported with a barrel
and a plunger. According to that ruling, "[w]hen the barrel is
placed against the finger and the plunger is pushed in, the sharp
metal tip protrudes by about 1/16th of an inch out of the barrel
and perforates the skin." NY 850301 is distinguishable from this
case because only the lancet is imported; a barrel and a plunger
are not involved.
HOLDING:
The subject blood lancet is classifiable under subheading
9018.39.00, HTSUSA, which provides for: "[s]yringes, needles,
catheters, cannulae and the like: [o]ther." The protest should
be granted. A copy of this decision should be attached to the
Customs Form 19 and mailed to the protestant as part of the
notice of action on the protest.
Sincerely,
John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division