The United States Court of International Trade has affirmed that football pants, jerseys, and girdle shells being brought into the country by sporting goods company Riddell, Inc. were properly classified as articles of apparel by U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
Central to the court’s ruling was the fact that even though the merchandise was intended for use in sports, it was worn on the body and composed entirely of textile material without padding. To be classified as sports equipment as Riddell had sought, the goods must be non-apparel-like merchandise, which is protective in nature.
The dispute in this case concerns whether Riddell’s football pants, jerseys, and girdle shells are properly classified as “articles of apparel” under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS).
The plaintiff argued, specifically, that its football pants, jerseys, and girdle shells resemble the hockey pants at issue in Bauer Nike Hockey USA, Inc. v. United States, 393 F.3d 1246 (Fed Cir. 2004), rather than the motorcycle jackets and pants at issue in Lemans Corp. v. United States, 660 F.3d 1311 (Fed. Cir. 2011). If the former, the merchandise would be classified as sports equipment, which would be more cost-effective for Riddell.
One area where Riddell’s argument was deficient was in the girdle shells.
The court pointed to definitions of girdles:
“1. Flexible, light-weight shaped corset, made partly or entirely of elastic. Worn to confine figure, especially through hip line. From The Fashion Dictionary, by Mary Brooks Picken (1973), at page 163.
“2. An elasticized flexible undergarment worn over the hips and waist. From Webster’s II New Riverside University Dictionary, (1984), at page 531.
“Neither of these definitions identify girdles as gender specific. All of the definitions, however, indicate that girdles are undergarments. Customs believes that currently girdles are commonly understood to be undergarments which provide support and hold in the body along the lower torso, specifically including the waist and hips.”
These definitions run counter to how sports equipment is defined under the Lemans framework, which establishes a protective component
“Riddell’s pants, jerseys and girdles … do not come bundled with or otherwise incorporate any form of padding or protective inserts,” wrote the court. “They are composed of textile materials and therefore do not offer much protection without the pads.”
Riddell’s other two arguments — that the fact that apparel was “required” or was an “accessory” triggered classification as equipment — were similarly unavailing.
Riddell, INC. v. United States; United States Court of International Trade; Consol. Court No. 09-00416, 2013 Ct. Intl. Trade LEXIS 40; SLIP OP. 2013-37; 3/20/13
Attorneys of Record: (for plaintiffs) Daniel J. Gluck, Christopher M. Kane, Joel K. Simon, Scott Zarin, and Mariana del Rio Kostenwein, Simon Gluck & Kane LLP, of New York. (for defendants) Marcella Powell, Trial Attorney, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, U.S. Department of Justice, of New York, NY for Defendant United States. With her on brief was Alexander Vanderweide, Trial Attorney. Also with her on the brief were Stuart F. Delery, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, and Barbara S. Williams, Attorney in Charge. Of counsel was Michael Heydrich, Office of Assistant Chief Counsel, International Trade Litigation, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, of New York.
