HQ 960409

October 24, 1997

CLA-2 RR:TC:TE 960409 jb

CATEGORY: Classification

Port Director

U.S. Customs

111 W. Huron Street

Buffalo, NY 14202

RE: Decision on Application for Further Review of Protest No.

0901-96-101256; demand for redelivery

Dear Sir:

This is a decision on application for further review of a

protest timely filed by Grunfeld, Desiderio, Lebowitz &

Silverman, LLP, on behalf of K & M Garment Mfg. Inc., against

your decision to demand redelivery of importations of women\'s

wearing apparel.

FACTS:

On April 25, 1996, Customs issued Notices to Redeliver on

Customs Forms CF 4647 to K & M Garment Mfg. Inc. with respect to

certain women\'s knit wearing apparel. The Protestant claims that

the demand for redelivery for this merchandise was untimely based

on the date of entry for this merchandise (approximately the

period of October 30,1995 through March 20, 1996), that is more

than 30 days after entry and release of the merchandise.

ISSUE:

Whether the issuance of the redelivery notices was proper?

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

19 CFR section 141.113(b) states:

For purposes of determining whether the country of origin of

textiles and textile products subject to the provisions of

§12.130 of this chapter has been accurately represented to

Customs, the release from Customs custody of any such

textile or textile product shall be deemed conditional

during the 180-day period following the date of release. If

the port director finds during the conditional release

period that a textile or textile product is not entitled to

admission into the commerce of the United States because the

country of origin of the textile or textile product was not

accurately represented to Customs, he shall promptly demand

its return to Customs custody. Notwithstanding the

provisions of paragraph (h) of this chapter and

§113.62(k)(1) of this chapter, a failure to comply with a

demand for return to Customs custody made under this

paragraph shall result in the assessment of liquidated

damages equal to the value of the merchandise involved.

The plain language of the above referenced regulation is

clear on its face. The issue at hand addresses the country of

origin of the subject merchandise and the manufacturing processes

which occur in the claimed country of origin. In the case of the

subject wearing apparel Customs had reason to believe that the

claimed country of origin was incorrect. Thus, as explicitly

stated in the regulation, Customs was well within its legal right

to act upon the conditional release period mandated by the

regulation.

Accordingly, the protest is denied in full.

HOLDING:

The protest should be denied in full and a copy of this

ruling should be appended to the CF 19 Notice of Action to

satisfy the notice requirement of section 174.30(a) Customs

Regulations.

In accordance with Section 3(A)(11)(b) of Customs Directive

099 3550-065, dated August 4, 1993, Subject: Revised Protest

Directive, this decision should be mailed by your office to the

Protestant no later than 60 days from the date of this letter.

Any reliquidation of the entry in accordance with the decision

must be accomplished prior to mailing of the decision. Sixty

days from the date of the decision the Office of Regulations and

Rulings will take steps to make the decision available to Customs

personnel via the Customs Rulings Module in ACS and the public

via the Diskette Subscription Service, Freedom of Information Act

and other public access channels.

Sincerely,

John Durant, Director

Commercial Rulings Division