HQ 952712: Application for further review of protest no. 2704-91-105017; classification of an earring closet or jewelry pocket (asopposed to a jewelry roll); HRL 089182

Native CBP ruling rendition. Applicability is fact-specific; modification/revocation relationships and original publisher date are retained. Publisher sentinel year0001 means unknown date, not a historical legal adoption.

                            HQ 952712

                         April 20, 1993

CLA-2 CO:R:C:T 952712 BC

CATEGORY:  Classification

TARIFF NO.:  3924.90.5000

District Director of Customs
U.S. Customs Service
300 S. Ferry Street
Terminal Island
Los Angeles, California 90731

RE:  Application for further review of protest no. 2704-91-
105017; classification of an earring closet or jewelry pocket (as
opposed to a jewelry roll); HRL 089182 

Dear Sir:

     This responds to the referenced application for further
review of protest no. 2704-91-105017, dated December 6, 1991.  We
have reviewed all relevant materials and our decision follows.

FACTS:

     The merchandise at issue is described as an earring closet
or jewelry pocket.  (This article is to be distinguished from a
jewelry roll.)  The earring closet consists of plastic sheeting,
26 inches long and 13 inches wide, designed to be folded over a
hanger.  When so hung, the earring closet is 13 inches long and
has twelve pockets on each side.  The closet is secured in place
by four snaps that affix the closet to the hanger.  There are no
zippers or snaps designed to secure each individual pocket.  The
outer material of the closet is PVC sheeting.

     The earring closet was classified under subheading
4202.92.4500, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
Annotated (HTSUSA), in New York Ruling Letter (NYRL) 860908,
issued on March 19, 1991.  By letter of April 11, 1991,
PROTESTANT (prior to filing a protest) requested reconsideration
of NYRL 860908.  Before a response was issued, merchandise was
entered on June 1, 1991, such entry being liquidated on September
20, 1991.  A September 30, 1991, letter supplemented PROTESTANT's
request for reconsideration (of NYRL 860908).

     On December 6, 1991, still prior to the issuance of a
response to PROTESTANT's request for reconsideration of NYRL
860908, PROTESTANT filed a timely protest.  Subsequently, on
January 21, 1992, we issued our response to PROTESTANT's request
for reconsideration of NYRL 860908.  Headquarters Ruling Letter
(HRL) 089182, issued on January 21, 1992, revoked NYRL 860908 and
held that the earring closet was classifiable under subheading
3924.90.5000, HTSUSA, covering, inter alia, household articles of
plastic.  That ruling responded to the issues raised in
PROTESTANT's letters of April 11, 1991, and September 30, 1991. 
These are the same issues raised in the instant protest.

     In the protest, PROTESTANT contends that the earring closet
is classifiable as a household item of plastic, other, other,
under 3924.90.5000, HTSUSA.  Customs contends that the earring
closet was correctly classified at liquidation under subheading
4202.92.4500, HTSUSA.

ISSUE:

     What is the proper classification of the plastic earring
closet at issue, subheading 3924.90.5000, HTSUSA, or subheading
4202.92.4500, HTSUSA?

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

     In HRL 089182, dated January 21, 1992, we held that the
earring closet in question was classifiable under heading 3924,
HTSUSA, on the grounds that between two prima facie applicable
headings, heading 3924, HTSUSA, more specifically describes the
earring closet than did heading 4202, HTSUSA.  Thus, by
application of General Rule of Interpretation (GRI) 3(a), the
earring closet was held to be classifiable under subheading
3924.90.5000, HTSUSA.  New York Ruling Letter 860908 was revoked.

     We herein affirm HRL 089182.  Consequently, this protest
should be approved.  Enclosed, please find a copy of HRL 089182
for your reference.

HOLDING:

     The plastic earring closet at issue is classifiable as a
household article of plastic, other, other, under subheading
3924.90.5000, HTSUSA.

                               Sincerely,




                               John Durant, Director
                               Commercial Rulings Division