Roche Vitamins, Inc. v. United States
2013 WL 3199081
Ct. Intl. Trade2013Background
- Roche challenges Customs' BetaTab 20% beta-carotene product classification under HTSUS.
- Customs classified BetaTab as food preparations not elsewhere specified or included (HTSUS 2106.90.97).
- Roche proposed alternative classifications: HTSUS 3204.19.35 (coloring matter) and K3204.19.35 (Pharmaceutical Appendix) or HTSUS 2936.10.00/2936.90.00 (provitamins).
- This Court previously denied Roche I summary judgment due to factual disputes about principal use and ingredient functionality.
- The trial featured Roche witnesses on use and marketing and a Government expert on medical aspects; post-trial briefing followed.
- The court ultimately held BetaTab is classifiable under HTSUS 2936.10.00 (provitamins, unmixed) with duty-free status, excluding 3204 and 2106 classifications.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether BetaTab is classifiable as a colorant under 3204 | Roche asserts BetaTab is a coloring matter under 3204 (and 3204.19.35). | Government contends principal use is provitamin, not colorant, so 3204 does not apply. | No; BetaTab is not principally a colorant; 2936 governs. |
| Whether BetaTab is a provitamin under 2936 | Roche argues BetaTab falls under 2936 as a provitamin with stabilizers permitted by Note 1(f). | Government contends stabilizers may not alter character to exclude 2936; but BetaTab remains a provitamin. | Yes; BetaTab is a provitamin under 2936. |
| Whether BetaTab is unmixed under 2936.10.00 | Roche contends the product’s stabilizers create a mixed product outside unmixed provitamins. | Government argues stabilizers allowed by Note 1(f) keep BetaTab unmixed with respect to the subheading. | BetaTab remains unmixed; falls under 2936.10.00. |
| Whether duty-free status applies via the Pharmaceutical Appendix | Roche sought K-status for duty-free entry under the Pharmaceutical Appendix. | Pharmaceutical Appendix status requires pharmaceutical use; BetaTab’s principal use is provitamin, not pharmaceutical. | Pharmacutical Appendix status not necessary to decide 2936.10.00 classification; BetaTab is duty-free under 2936.10.00. |
Key Cases Cited
- Aromont USA, Inc. v. United States, 671 F.3d 1310 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (principal-use and commercially fungible analysis guidance)
- Carl Zeiss, Inc. v. United States, 195 F.3d 1375 (Fed. Cir. 1999) (common meanings of tariff terms; heading construction)
- Degussa Corp. v. United States, 508 F.3d 1044 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (exclusion of modified reactive properties from heading 29)
- BASF Corp. v. United States, 482 F.3d 1324 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (pharmaceutical appendix and drug-use considerations)
- Primal Lite, Inc. v. United States, 182 F.3d 1365 (Fed. Cir. 1999) (Carborundum factors for commercial fungibility; principal use)
- Jarvis Clark Co. v. United States, 733 F.2d 873 (Fed. Cir. 1984) (allocation of evidentiary burden in classification)
- Lenox Collections v. United States, 20 CIT 194 (1996) (treating arguments on HTS subheading interpretation)