54566 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 178 / Thursday, September 15, 2005 / Notices 

complex and meaningful assembly 

operations involving a large number of 

components will generally result in a 

substantial transformation. For example, in 

Headquarters Ruling Letter (‘‘HRL’’) 562495 

dated November 13, 2002, color ink jet 

printers were assembled in Singapore of 

components imported from a number of other 

countries. CBP determined that the imported 

components were substantially transformed 

during assembly such that the country of 

origin of the assembled ink jet printers was 

Singapore. In support of this position, CBP 

recognized that the processing operations 

that occurred within Singapore were 

complex and extensive, required the 

integration of 13 major subassemblies to the 

chassis, and that the resulting product was a 

new and distinct article of commerce that 

possessed a new name, character, and use. 

In HRL 561734 dated March 22, 2001, 

published in the Federal Register on March 

29, 2001 (66 FR 17222), CBP held that certain 

multi-functional machines (consisting of 

printer, copier, and fax machines) assembled 

in Japan were a product of that country for 

purposes of U.S. Government procurement. 

The multi-functional machines were 

assembled from 227 parts (108 parts obtained 

from Japan, 92 from Thailand, 3 from China, 

and 24 from other countries) and eight 

subassemblies, each of which was assembled 

in Japan. One of the subassemblies produced 

in Japan, referred to as the scanner unit, was 

described as the ‘‘heart of the machine.’’ In 

finding that the imported parts were 

substantially transformed in Japan, CBP 

stated that the individual parts and 

components lost their separate identities 

when they became part of the multifunctional machine. See also, HRL 561568 

dated March 22, 2001, published in the 

Federal Register on March 29, 2001 (66 FR 

17222). 

By contrast, assembly operations that are 

minimal or simple will generally not result 

in a substantial transformation. For example, 

in HRL 734050 dated June 17, 1991, CBP 

held that Japanese-origin components were 

not substantially transformed in China when 

assembled in that country to form finished 

printers. The printers consisted of five main 

components identified as the ‘‘head’’, 

‘‘mechanism’’, ‘‘circuit’’, ‘‘power source’’, 

and ‘‘outer case.’’ The circuit, power source 

and outer case units were entirely assembled 

or molded in Japan. The head and 

mechanical units were made in Japan but 

exported to China in an unassembled state. 

All five units were exported to China where 

the head and mechanical units were 

assembled with screws and screwdrivers. 

Thereafter, the head, mechanism, circuit, and 

power source units were mounted onto the 

outer case with screws and screwdrivers. In 

holding that the country of origin of the 

assembled printers was Japan, CBP 

recognized that the vast majority of the 

printer’s parts were of Japanese origin and 

that the operations performed in China were 

relatively simple assembly operations. 

The programming operations performed in 

the instant case must also be considered. In 

Data General Corporation v. United States, 4 

CIT 182 (1982), the Court of International 

Trade held that a PROM (programmable readonly memory) fabricated in a foreign country 

but programmed in the United States for use 

in a computer circuit board assembled abroad 

was substantially transformed. In Data 

General, the court stated that the electronic 

pattern introduced into the circuit by 

programming gave the PROM the function as 

a read only memory and that the essence of 

the article, its pattern of interconnection or 

stored memory, was established by 

programming. 

As applied, we find that the various 

foreign-origin parts are substantially 

transformed within the United States when 

assembled to form the Kodak i600 line of 

scanners in the manner set forth above. In 

making this determination we note that the 

scanners are comprised of approximately 600 

parts and thirteen subassemblies. Ten of the 

subassemblies are assembled to completion 

within the United States during a complex 

and meaningful process. Illustrative 

examples of two major subassemblies built to 

completion in the United States are the E-Box 

assembly (comprised of approximately 50 

parts) and the pod assembly (comprised of 

more than 180 parts). During the main build 

phase of production, the various 

subassemblies and literally hundreds of 

additional parts are assembled together to 

form the scanners. Specialized fixtures, 

tooling, and other equipment are used 

throughout assembly to align, test, and 

calibrate the scanners as they are built. After 

assembly, the scanners are programmed with 

firmware developed in the United States, 

which constitutes the intelligence of the 

scanners. During such assembly and 

programming operations, the individual 

components and subassemblies of foreignorigin are subsumed into a new and distinct 

article of commerce that has a new name, 

character, and use. Therefore, we find that 

the country of origin of the Kodak i600 

scanners for purposes of U.S. Government 

procurement is the United States. 

Holding: Based upon the specific facts of 

this case, we find that the individual 

components and subassemblies imported 

into the United States are substantially 

transformed when assembled in the manner 

set forth above to form Kodak i600 desktop 

scanners. Therefore, the country of origin of 

the Kodak i600 line of desktop scanners for 

purposes of U.S. Government procurement is 

the United States. 

Notice of this final determination will be 

given in the Federal Register as required by 

19 CFR 177.29. Any party-at-interest other 

than the party which requested this final 

determination may request, pursuant to 19 

CFR 177.31, that CBP reexamine the matter 

anew and issue a new final determination. 

Any party-at-interest may, within 30 days 

after publication of the Federal Register 

notice referenced above, seek judicial review 

of this final determination before the Court 

of International Trade. 

Sincerely, 

Michael T. Schmitz, 

Assistant Commissioner, Office of 

Regulations and Rulings. 

[FR Doc. 05–18359 Filed 9–14–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Bureau of Customs and Border 

Protection 

Notice of Cancellation of Customs 

Broker License Due to Death of the 

License Holder 

AGENCY: Bureau of Customs and Border 

Protection, U.S. Department of 

Homeland Security. 

ACTION: General notice. 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that, 

pursuant to Title 19 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations § 111.51(a), the 

following individual Customs broker 

licenses and any and all permits have 

been cancelled due to the death of the 

broker: 

Name License 

No. Port name 

Thomas A. Borgia ... 10419 Miami. 

Karl A. Becnel ......... 09684 New 

Orleans. 

Dated: September 8, 2005. 

Jayson P. Ahern, 

Assistant Commissioner, Office of Field 

Operations. 

[FR Doc. 05–18360 Filed 9–14–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Bureau of Customs and Border 

Protection 

Notice of Cancellation of Customs 

Broker Permit 

AGENCY: Bureau of Customs and Border 

Protection, U.S. Department of 

Homeland Security. 

ACTION: General notice. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 641 of the 

Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, (19 

U.S.C. 1641) and the Customs 

Regulations (19 CFR 111.51), the 

following Customs broker permits are 

cancelled without prejudice. 

Name Permit Issuing port 

General Brokerage Services, Inc. ..................................................................................................................... H34 Miami.