Opinion ID: 772399
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Proper Meaning of Baboen

Text: 24 To determine the meaning of a tariff classification term, only the term used in the tariff classification may be analyzed. Cf. Neuman & Schiers Co., Inc. v. United States, 24 CCPA 127, 132 (1936) (Courts have never broadened the rule [of determining commercial designation] so far as to permit proof of commercial designation of terms other than the precise terms used in the statute.). Baboen is the term designated in the relevant portion of subheading 4412.11.20, HTSUS (1992-1995). VIROLA is not an HTSUS term at issue in this case. Consequently, this court will only assess the meaning of the tariff term Baboen. 25 The first step in properly construing a tariff classification term is to determine whether Congress clearly defined that term in either the HTSUS or its legislative history. Mita Copystar, 21 F.3d at 1082. As correctly recognized by the Court of International Trade, neither the HTSUS nor its legislative history defines the term Baboen. 26 When a tariff term is not defined in either the HTSUS or its legislative history, the term's correct meaning is its common or dictionary meaning in the absence of evidence to the contrary. Rohm & Haas, 727 F.2d at 1097; Mita Copystar, 21 F.3d at 1082. To determine the common meaning of a tariff term, [a] court may rely upon its own understanding of terms used, and may consult standard lexicographic and scientific authorities . . . . Mita Copystar, 21 F.3d at 1082 (citing Brookside Veneers, Ltd. v. United States, 847 F.2d 786, 789 (Fed. Cir. 1988)). In addition, a court may refer to the Explanatory Notes of a tariff subheading, which do not constitute controlling legislative history but nonetheless are intended to clarify the scope of HTSUS subheadings and to offer guidance in interpreting subheadings. Id. (citing Lynteq, Inc. v. United States, 976 F.2d 693, 699 (Fed. Cir. 1992)). 27 One who argues that a tariff term should not be construed in accordance with its common or dictionary definition must prove that 'there is a different commercial meaning in existence which is definite, uniform, and general throughout the trade.' Rohm & Haas, 727 F.2d at 1097 (quoting Moscahlades Bros. v. United States, 42 CCPA 78, 82 (1954)). The concept of commercial designation was intended to apply to cases where the trade designation is so universal and well understood that the Congress, and all the trade, are supposed to have been fully acquainted with the practice at the time the law was enacted. Id. (quoting Jas. Akeroyd & Co. v. United States, 15 Ct. Cust. 440, 443 (1928)); see also Two Hundred Chests of Tea, Smith, 22 U.S. 430, 438, 6 L. Ed. 128 (1824) (Congress must be understood to use [a tariff term] in its known commercial sense.). 28 The Supreme Court, referring to a predecessor tariff statute, has stated: Whether a particular article were [sic] designated by one name or another, in the country of its origin . . . was of no importance in the view of the Legislature. Two Hundred Chests of Tea, 22 U.S. at 439. The Court continued: [The Legislature] applied its attention to description of the articles as they derived their appellations in our own markets, in our domestic as well as our foreign traffic. Id. While the Explanatory Notes indicate that the pilot-names delineated in the Annex are based on the popular name employed in the principal country of production or consumption, Explanatory Notes at 623, the Explanatory Notes are not controlling. Lynteq, 976 F.2d at 699. Therefore, in accordance with Supreme Court jurisprudence, in considering the commercial designation of a tariff term, only commercial use of that term in the United States is relevant. 29 It is uncontroverted that in the United States, the merchandise imported by Stadelman during the relevant time period was known as VIROLA, not Baboen. Because it is undisputed that the term Baboen was not used commercially in the United States during the relevant time period, the Court of International Trade analyzed Baboen's common, dictionary definition. Similarly, to properly interpret the tariff term Baboen de novo, we must assess lexicons to determine that term's common meaning. 30 Few standard dictionaries define the term Baboen. One standard dictionary defines Baboen as a tropical American timber tree (Myristica surinamensis) with reddish wood. Webster's New International Dictionary 197 (2d ed. 1955); Webster's Third New International Dictionary 156 (1993). Myristica is a botanical genus within the botanical family, Myristicaceae. The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Botany, 268 (Michael Allaby ed., 1992). 31 A technical dictionary defines Baboen as Virola surinamensis. Mabberley, D.J., The Plant Book: A Portable Dictionary of the Vascular Plants 71 (2d ed. 1997). Virola surinamensis is a tropical American timber within the botanical genus, Virola, and is a member of the botanical family, Myristicaceae. Id. at 747-48. Therefore, both standard and technical dictionaries indicate that Baboen is wood within the Myristicaceae family. The genera comprising Sumauma (Ceiba pentandra), Faveira (Parkia spp.), and Mangue (T. rhoisoia) are not members of the Myristicaceae family. 6 Watson, L. & Dallwitz, M.J., The Families of Flowering Plants: Descriptions, Illustrations, and Information Retrieval, http://www.keil.ukans.edu/delta/angio/www/myristic.htm (Version: Dec. 14, 2000). 32 Further, toward the end of the nineteenth century, Myristica was the only recognized genus of the botanical family, Myristicaceae. E. Warming, A Handbook of Systematic Botany 393 (1895). The scope of the Myristicaceae family, however, has been broadened to include multiple genera, including the Virola genus. Hyam, Roger & Pankhurst, Richard, Plants and Their Names: A Concise Dictionary 332 (1995); The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Botany at 268. As recognized by the Court of International Trade, it appears that the standard dictionary definition of Baboen as Myristica surinamensis is based on an outdated scientific definition of the term that was replaced by Virola surinamensis when the Virola genus became recognized under the Myristicaceae family. Stadelman, 83 F. Supp. 2d at 1360. That is, both standard and technical dictionaries indicate that Baboen is defined as Virola surinamensis--a species within the Virola genus. 33 This court may also consider the Explanatory Notes and its Annex for non-binding guidance in construing the tariff term Baboen. Lynteq, 976 F.2d 699. Six scientific names correspond to the pilot-name Baboen in the Annex: Virola venezuelensis, Virola bicuhyba, Virola melinonii, Virola surinamensis, Virola mycetis, and Virola koschnyi. Each of these species is a member of the Virola genus, which is within the Myristicaceae family. Watson & Dallwitz. No local name in the United States is listed as corresponding to the pilot-name Baboen. 34 The Explanatory Notes indicate that the local name in Surinam corresponding to the pilot-name Baboen is Baboen. Explanatory Notes at 643. In considering the common, dictionary definition of an HTSUS term, only common use of that term in the United States is relevant. Cf. Two Hundred Chests of Tea, 22 U.S. at 438 (Whether a particular article were [sic] designated by one name or another, in the country of its origin . . . was of no importance in the view of the Legislature. . . . It applied its attention to the description of articles as they derived their appellations in our own markets . . . .). 35 Therefore, while standard lexicographic, scientific, and Explanatory Notes definitions of Baboen differ slightly, each relevant definition limits the common meaning of Baboen to species of the Myristicaceae family and likely to species of the Virola genus. Stadelman's imports, Sumauma, Faveira, and Mangue, are indisputably not species within the Virola genus and are not members of the Myristicaceae family. Watson & Dallwitz. Therefore, Stadelman's imports are not classifiable under subheading 4412.11.20, HTSUS (1992-1995), which covers plywood with at least one outer ply of . . . Baboen [or any other enumerated woods.] 36 We have considered Stadelman's other arguments and determined that they lack merit.