CLA-2-90:OT:RR:NC:N2:212
Adrian Estrada
Clearfield, Inc
7050 Winnetka Ave N Minneapolis, MN 55428
RE: The country of origin of fiber optic modules
Dear Mr. Estrada:
In your letter dated March 15, 2023, you requested a country of origin ruling.
There are two items at issue with this request. The first items are described as fiber optic jumper assemblies and are identified by the following part numbers:
DZ2-12-CCA-ZZZ-03
DZ2-024-GCJ-ZZZ-01
DA1-012-CXA-ZZZ-01
These assemblies are comprised of a grouping of fiber optic bundles affixed with connectors at one end. These jumper assemblies are further incorporated into other fiber optic network devices for use in commercial and private networking installations.
In your request, you describe the manufacturing process as occurring in China using Indian origin optical fibers. The optical fibers are cut to length and the ends are fanned out prior to the connectors being added.
The second item at issue is described as a fiber optic cassette and is identified by the following part numbers:
EPZ-012-C2F-Black-SUB
EPZ-012-C2F-SUB
The subject articles consist of a fiber optic cable jumper assembly with connectors affixed at each end enclosed within a plastic tray. The subject assemblies function identically and are used to provide fiber optic network connection within a commercial or private installation.
You state that the manufacturing process occurs in China and begins with the manufacture of the jumper assembly as described above. This jumper assembly is then placed within a plastic adapter plate, which is then placed within a splice tray. The jumper assembly within the tray is then inserted into the cassette housing before the completed cassette is tested for functionality and packaged for exportation. You state that the various components, including the adapter plate, splice tray, and cassette housing are sourced from multiple countries such as China, Taiwan, and Vietnam.
The “country of origin” is defined in 19 CFR 134.1(b), in pertinent part, as “the country of manufacture, production, or growth of any article of foreign origin entering the United States. Further work or material added to an article in another country must effect a substantial transformation in order to render such other country the 'country of origin' within the meaning of this part.”
For tariff purposes, the courts have held that a substantial transformation occurs when an article emerges from a process with a new name, character or use different from that possessed by the article prior to processing. United States v. Gibson-Thomsen Co., Inc., 27 CCPA 267, C.A.D. 98 (1940); National Hand Tool Corp. v. United States, 16 CIT 308 (1992), aff’d, 989 F. 2d 1201 (Fed. Cir. 1993); Anheuser Busch Brewing Association v. The United States, 207 U.S. 556 (1908) and Uniroyal Inc. v. United States, 542 F. Supp. 1026 (1982).
Further, in Energizer Battery, Inc. v. United States, 190 F. Supp. 3d 1308 (2016), the Court of International Trade (“CIT”) interpreted the meaning of “substantial transformation” as used in the Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (“TAA”) for purposes of government procurement. In Energizer, the court reviewed the “name, character and use” test in determining whether a substantial transformation had occurred in determining the origin of a flashlight and reviewed various court decisions involving substantial transformation determinations. The court noted, citing Uniroyal, Inc. v. United States, 3 C.I.T. 220, 226, 542 F. Supp. 1026, 1031, aff’d, 702 F.2d 1022 (Fed. Cir. 1983), that when “the post-importation processing consists of assembly, courts have been reluctant to find a change in character, particularly when the imported articles do not undergo a physical change.” Energizer at 1318. In addition, the court noted, “when the end-use was pre-determined at the time of importation, courts have generally not found a change in use.” Energizer at 1319, citing as an example, National Hand Tool Corp. v. United States, 16 C.I.T. 308, 310, aff’d 989 F.2d 1201 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Furthermore, courts have considered the nature of the assembly, i.e., whether it is a simple assembly or more complex, such that individual parts lose their separate identities and become integral parts of a new article.
Regarding the origin of the fiber optic jumper assemblies, it is the opinion of this office that the Indian origin optical fibers impart the character of the finished item. Further, the simple process of fanning the ends of the fibers and adding connectors is not significantly complex in order to substantially transform the fibers into a new and different article of commerce. As these jumper assemblies are used to complete the finished fiber optic cassettes, we are also of the view that the incorporation of the jumper assembly into the various plastic components does not transform the assembly. As the jumper assembly imparts the character of the finished cassette, the origin of the jumper assembly would also confer the origin of the finished cassette.
Based on the information provided as well as the pertinent authorities, the origin of the jumper assemblies, identified by part numbers DZ2-12-CCA-ZZZ-03, DZ2-024-GCJ-ZZZ-01, and DA1-012-CXA-ZZZ-01 will be India. Further, the origin of the fiber optic cassettes, part numbers EPZ-012-C2F-Black-SUB and EPZ-012-C2F-SUB will also be India.
This ruling is being issued under the provisions of Part 177 of the Customs and Border Protection Regulations (19 C.F.R. 177).
A copy of the ruling or the control number indicated above should be provided with the entry documents filed at the time this merchandise is imported. If you have any questions regarding the ruling, please contact National Import Specialist Luke LePage at [email protected].
Sincerely,
Steven A. Mack
Director
National Commodity Specialist Division