On June 29, 2010, the CIT issued its decision in Canex International Lumber Sales Ltd. v. United States. In its complaint, lumber importer Canex raised two issues. First, it argued that CBP modified or revoked two prior ruling letters without proper notice and comment. Second, it argued that CBP misclassified the imported products as sawn lumber under HTSUS subheading 4407.10.0015, rather than as roof truss components under HTSUS subheading 4418.90.4020 or, in the alternative, other articles of wood under HTSUS subheading 4421.90.984.
The CIT ruled in favor of CBP on both issues by granting CBP’s cross-motion for summary judgment. With regard to the first issue, the CIT held that notice and comment were not required because the imports in question were not identical to the products that were subject to the prior ruling letters. The merchandise that had been the subject of the prior rulings was specifically destined for use as part of a roof truss system. The end use of Canex’s lumber was not clear.
The CIT also held that CBP properly classified Canex’s merchandise under HTSUS heading 4407. The Court ruled that classification under HTSUS heading 4418 would be improper because the lumber was not advanced enough to be used exclusively in roof trusses, it was not identified as truss components at the time of importation, and it “is not sufficiently similar to beams, rafters and roof struts to be classified as carpentry.” The CIT found that classification under HTSUS heading 4421 would also be improper because this heading excludes merchandise specified under heading 4407.