after sixty three no seven very good you know we're arguing that the product is classifiable as a plastic article in chapter thirty nine articles of chapter thirty nine cannot stay in chapter thirty nine if they're also provided for in section eleven of the tariff section eleven of tara is the section which incorporates all the textile provisions including chapter fifty nine and chapter sixty three when we get to the section notes for chapter section eleven of the tariff it requires in a threshold decision as to whether or not we have a fabric that is a textile fabric or plastic fabric again because it's a plastic fabric plastic plastic fabric composite good and it meets one of the definitions and that section note for chapter four chapter fifty nine then the section note chapter eleven pushes this case pushes this product into chapter thirty nine for terror classification purposes so that's where the first inquiry is do we have a textile article for purposes of section eleven of the tariff and to determine that we classified so when we look at the snow this note very specifically x clued from classification in chapter fifty nine and therefore x is classed as a text article textile plastic composite goods that have met meet one of two discrete criteria one is they are either completely imbedded in the plastic in the textile fabric is completely embedded in the fabric or to the textile fabric is covered position here we believe that that particular no sets out to discrete exceptions to the rule that these types of projects stay in chapter fifty nine so that the textile component on its face how does this i mean part of the problem is neither of you know that a very good job of giving us the big picture of how this operates and you just because you seem to agree why three is the key question and that may be but we have to understand the whole picture why isn't it just automatically in fifty nine o three because of it is it because so it falls in a but it's made up it goes back to sixty three so as a matter of tariff construction in general rule interpretation one says you start by looking at the headings and you look at applicable section and chapter notes and so here we have an applicable chapter no chapter no three because it's not a fabric it's a made up article and if what i understand you'd be saying is correct that it can't come in sixty three zero seven is a made up oracle unless the middle article is made up with a fabric which would be covered by fifty nine o three is that that's exactly our argument you're out of it since this product is not a fabric a fifty nine zero three because of the application of the chapter not the chapter fifty nine it can't be considered textile article and then the section no carbon entire text also action says it can't state as it says well let me make sure i completely understand you if it falls within fifteen or three textile fabrics impregnated coated covered with plastic or the like because it's made up and it goes back to sixty three if it falls within the exception and it goes to thirty nine because it's not a textile fabric within the meaning of fifty nine three yes that's exactly the positions of the parties here but then i'm sorry i'm just going to ask is your fabric impregnated with plastic our fabric is impregnate a plastic and it's coated on one side the plastic that's our position that  to that's very important and consequently doesn't that cause you a problem in terms of if i understand correctly you're saying in order to come under sixty three zero seven it has to be a textile under fifty nine o three and water and what you say is well it doesn't come under fifty nine or three because it's in bed but in order to determine the mean invented can't we look to the language of fifty nine o three which seems to cover textile fabrics impregnated and since you yourself said a minute ago that this is a pregnant fabric why doesn't that mean question but your honor if it's an embedded fabric and if then pregnant fabric is not within fifty nine o three again you have to look at the notes because there are some notes which describe how embedded fabric would be classified as well so  difference between imbedded and impregnated so the way we are describing it is something is impregnated when the plastic collar in this case is forcefully pushed into the inters the cs of the fabric that happens here with our product also our product however has a coating on top of one of the surfaces so it's more been simply impregnated it has virtues of two of these plastic treatments it's coated on one side than the plastic that forms the coating on one side you know it's the same plastic it's the same it's the same tree is it done all of the same process is not the same process it's specifically done that way to to leave a film on the top of the surface problem is there seems to there seems to be a dichotomy in fifty nine of three between things that are impregnated in code versus things that are embedded you agree with that the only reference to that yes or no yes and that we believe means it's in bed it's not one or the other so that is that is our position why this is embedded that is our position why pursuant to the chapter no this product is not so it's this if you treatment just filled the interstices and didn't coat either side that would just be impregnated yes and so it would be under the a far and therefore get put back into sixty three yes and so you're arguing arguing that it needs more than just coating on both sides so that embedded means it's completely embedded throughout well in this situation the threads of the fabric are completely embedded in the plastic because the plastic is forced into the in entirely embedded in the plastic except one side of it is not except the one side that's not on the government's argument in fact difference between being imbedded in completely and that it i have to say i find completely to be a really odd modifier for the word embed it but there must be a difference between being embedded and being completely invented your honor i would just suggest that you can have fabrics which you only apply plastic to part of it that would not be completely  textile is not embedded in the plastic it's not as if we had a ten foot long piece of of textile fabric and we only only treated the middle of it with with a plastic coating is the perimeter of your family or completely surrounded by plastic it would be easier because again during the night kind of like you know hollywood star walk of fame where you look at the stars on the sidewalks the perimeter of each of those stars you're surrounded by some surrounded by the ring we're only because of the way the products manufacture all the interest of caesar field of plastics of interest to see is at the edges of the plot of the fabric are filled as well so i would enter yes it is you know least in his hypothetical imbedded with completely and that i was writing them the same thing as i understood such chance hypothetical he was asking whether that those particular surfaces the side surfaces also had a plastic treatment as we know the mass in which the textile fabric has been completely embedded the entire you have your argument is that each eye over of the fabric is surrounded by the surrounding mass of plastic when the plastic loses through are treated the way the street this is treated creates something where that fabric is entirely embedded in the plastic and at the thread level each of those threads is entirely and completely imbedded in the plastic it would be on all sides so every side of the fabric is completely surrounded by the trustor completely covered completely covered you with the other are you talking about the entirely covered entirely covered it's on both sides it's getting at the same thing it's just the process that's used to get there so inventing is a it's a different process from covering a coding and what that covering with plastic and it's completely covered it will have plastic on both sides it will be so it will be but i mean it doesn't have to be that yeah it might not mean that's correct it might not be you know if you didn't argue that's and i'm not sure i'm allowed to come up with good arguments for you but it seems to me that that's one potential difference is that covering doesn't necessarily mean big scene the covering to the air material so you could have a piece of text out there brick entirely covered in some kind of  entirely covered there's a lot of different ways for something to be entirely covered one of them would be if it's completely embedded no i think it's just getting at two different ways of can generate in terms of many different ways you could cover entirely something else yeah i think when you look at it on your version of completely invalid it means that one object us to be it will be i don't i'm not sure if it will be imbedded in the sense that you want to say because i think the exception developing this thing for us is in it but instead of leaving one side of it open so that the fabric absorb dyes and everything it just pushes plastic all the way through and so it is entirely impregnated and covered all around in plastic why is it there completely and that it would be completely invented if it's on both sides it would be the way the product is being described it would be completely  d if you had it on both sides and but it also could be completely cover it could be completely coated here again it's undisputed that the process and the reason there's a little bit of a disconnect i think is so i think the relevant exception here is really whether the product is covered coated on both sides in plastic that's really the relevant exception applies here because undisputed that comporting of can you last year and this is what's troubling though makes very little sense to me frankly the way it's written can you give me an example of something that's completely embedded in plastic but that would be completely covered by plastic i think it would be it's hard to tell what the because i think that what the two terminologies are getting at is a process so when you look at a product it's going to look similar i don't thing looking at a product with the  the naked eye you going to be able to tell how it was made so i think the note is really getting at no matter how this product is made the end result should be the same which is the plastic has to be all around the fabric and that's what the note is trying to get at i don't know if there is you know to know whether i guess if you took a stick and put it in cement fully put it in cement there's no part of the stick sticking out that would be completely  ded and covered on both sides so what exactly is the difference between those too the way the product is there there's no difference what the end what the product is is that it's surrounded by plastic it's all plastic is all around so completely bedded or vetted and coated and covered all trying to get at the same end result they're all trying to get at the same and product that you have which is a product of surrounded in plastic on everything single site so if there's one side that's not covered in plastic accordion plastic like big sausage casings here and doesn't fall in the exception i mean having fifty nine or three  impregnated and coated fabrics part of a shirts and the only reason why he gets kicked out is if you have a product where the plastic is so extensive meaning that it's on all sides of it there's nothing that's not touched with interact with the product inside that's right to capture the flavorings and so that's you know that's all undisputed so again how it would get kicked out is if that should just be the end of the increase here  classified these products for sixty three zero seven this two point components to it in the article the strict requirements article has to be made up and it has made up and it has to be of any textile fabric so we all agree nobody's disputing that this is a made up article the argument is over whether this is really a textile fabric and in order to make that determination that's where you look at not to chapter fifty nine which says impregnate coded covered that bricks with plastic automatically prime official in heading fifty nine zero three so this is a fabric of fifty nine o three and that's why you're taking care of the second requirement for sixty three zero seven you know in the future it might be helpful if you give completely here it's you know embedded in better and better but there is a statutory term completely here which does add something to just that in and that's that it has to be on every single side on all surfaces to your honor if we could look at the the hollywood star issue clearly that is completely embedded in concrete the government come here and say no it has to have concrete on top of the on top of the star to make  surplusage so they want you to read out the distinction between something completely embedded and something covered or coated on both sides she's pacific came up here and said in order to be completely embedded it need to be covered or coded on characteristics we have offered an analysis which explains what those physical characteristics are for purposes of being completely embedded our product is fixed firmly in plastic it does not you laminate no part of the fabric is not fix the plastic coating for that reason we believe we have a product that has to be classified in chapter thirteen on the tariff because it's no longer a five textile article and specifically within chapter thirty nine heading thirty nine roger thank you thank both