R.T. Foods, Inc. v. United States, 2012 WL 6554767

This ITC case concerns tariff classification of frozen tempura-battered vegetables from Thailand, sold as Bird’s Nests and Vegetable Medley.
Twenty-four entries were imported between Oct 2007 and Aug 2008 across Boston and Long Beach.
Customs classified some entries under HTSUS 2004.90.85 (11.2%); others were liquidated under 2106.90.99 (duty-free) or at 11.2%.
Plaintiff protested all twenty-four entries in Mar 2009; denials were issued in 2009; plaintiff filed suit in Oct 2009.
The court addresses jurisdiction issues for three protests and then the merits of the classification under the General Rules of Interpretation.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Jurisdiction over Protest 0401-09-100048	Tolling due to Customs inaction; summons timely under 180 days	180-day period triggered by initial protest denial; tolling not provided	Lacks jurisdiction over Protest 0401-09-100048
Jurisdiction over Protest 2704-09-100996	Entries injured by liquidation at duty-free rate; redress sought	Eleven entries liquidated at duty-free rate; no injury in fact for those	Lacks jurisdiction over the eleven entries
Proper tariff classification of Bird’s Nests and Vegetable Medley	Classify under HTSUS 2106.90.99 as frozen food preparations	Classify under HTSUS 2004.90.85 as other vegetables and mixtures	Correct classification is 2004.90.85; not 2106.90.99

Pillowtex Corp. v. United States, 171 F.3d 1370 (Fed. Cir. 1999) ( GRIs focus on headings; classification question is legal and determinable by records)
Universal Elec. Inc. v. United States, 112 F.3d 488 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (court reviews pure questions of law de novo in classification cases)
Cummins Inc. v. United States, 454 F.3d 1361 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (classification is a question of law when merchandise is undisputed)
Jarvis Clark Co. v. United States, 733 F.2d 873 (Fed. Cir. 1984) (duty classification aims to find correct result by appropriate procedure)