CLA-2 CO:R:C:T 088101 CMR

Ms. Christine Berghofer
Customs Manager
Associated Merchandising Corporation
50 Terminal Road
Secaucus, New Jersey 07094

RE: Revocation of HRL 082997 of April 3, 1989; Classification of men's sleepwear

Dear Ms. Berghofer:

On April 3, 1989, this office issued a ruling to your company on the classification of certain men's sleepwear. At the request of our New York office we have reconsidered this ruling and found the classification stated therein to be in error.

FACTS:

The samples involved in HRL 082997 were described as follows:

Style PJ-4001 is a pair of 100 percent cotton flannel pants with cuffed leg bottoms, elasticized waist and a fly front the snaps. Style WS-4001 is similar but is made of a 55 percent cotton/45 percent polyester woven fabric.

It was indicated that the garments were men's sleepwear manufactured in Hong Kong.

ISSUE:

Were the subject garments properly classified in HRL 082997 as other men's sleepwear in subheading 6207.91.30, HTSUSA, or should they be classified as men's pajamas in subheading 6207.21.00, HTSUSA?

-2-

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

The subject pants, although clearly recognizable as men's sleepwear in HRL 082997, did not include pajama tops, and therefore, were classified as "other" sleepwear.

These garments fit the general description of typical men's pajama bottoms and should be classified as such, whether imported separately or with tops as sets.

HOLDING:

The subject garments are classified as men's pajama bottoms of subheading 6207.21.0010, HTSUSA, if they have two or more colors in the warp and/or the filling, or subheading 6207.21.0030, HTSUSA. The garments are subject to textile category 351 and dutiable at 9.5 percent ad valorem.

In order to insure uniformity in Customs classification of this merchandise and eliminate uncertainty, we are revoking HRL 082997 to reflect the above classification effective with the date of this letter. However, if, after you review this ruling letter, you disagree with the legal basis for our decision, we invite you to submit any arguments you might have with respect to this matter for our review. Any submission you wish to make should be received within 30 days of the date of this letter.

This notice to you should be considered a revocation of HRL 082997 under 19 CFR 177.9(d)(1). It is not to be applied retroactively to HRL 082997 (19 CFR 177.9(d)(2)) and will not, therefore, affect past transactions for the importation of your merchandise under that ruling. However, for the purposes of future transactions in merchandise of this type, HRL 082997 will not be valid precedent.

We recognize that pending transactions may be adversely affected by this revocation in that current contracts for importations arriving at a port subsequent to this decision will be classified pursuant to it. If such a situation arises, you may, at your discretion, notify this office and may apply for relief from the binding effects of this decision as may be warranted by the circumstances. However, please be advised that in some instances involving import restraints, such relief may require separate approvals from other government agencies.

The designated textile and apparel category may be subdivided into parts. If so, the visa and quota requirements applicable to the subject merchandise may be affected. Since part categories are the result of international bilateral agreements which are subject to frequent renegotiations and -3-

changes, to obtain the most current information available, we suggest you check, close to the time of shipment, the Status Report On Current Import Quotas (Restraint Levels), an internal issuance of the U.S. Customs Service which is updated weekly and is available for inspection at your local Customs office.

Due to the changeable nature of the statistical annotation (the ninth and tenth digits of the classification) and the restraint (quota/visa) categories, you should contact your local Customs office prior to importation of this merchandise to determine the current status of any import restraints or requirements.

Sincerely,

John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division