Request for Reconsideration of New York Ruling Letter F82426, dated February 22, 2000, on the Tariff Classification of a "Smart Glove" wrist support Dear Dr. MacMorran: This is in reply to your letter of October 10, 2004, requesting reconsideration of New York Ruling Letter F82426, dated February 22, 2000, classifying your product described as a "Smart Glove" wrist support in subheading 6116.92.6440, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States Annotated (HTSUSA), as a fingerless mitt. You assert that the "Smart Glove" is an orthopedic wrist support classifiable in either subheading 9021.19.8500, HTSUSA, or subheading 6307.90.9889, HTSUSA. You submitted a sample of the "Smart Glove", a summary of a study performed on the "Smart Glove", and a number of customer testimonials to aid us in our determination. FACTS: The merchandise under consideration, designated as a "Smart Glove", is made from two layers of a knit fabric which is 90 percent cotton and 10 percent spandex. This fabr
Reasoning
Request for Reconsideration of New York Ruling Letter F82426, dated February 22, 2000, on the Tariff Classification of a "Smart Glove" wrist support Dear Dr. MacMorran: This is in reply to your letter of October 10, 2004, requesting reconsideration of New York Ruling Letter F82426, dated February 22, 2000, classifying your product described as a "Smart Glove" wrist support in subheading 6116.92.6440, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States Annotated (HTSUSA), as a fingerless mitt. You assert that the "Smart Glove" is an orthopedic wrist support classifiable in either subheading 9021.19.8500, HTSUSA, or subheading 6307.90.9889, HTSUSA. You submitted a sample of the "Smart Glove", a summary of a study performed on the "Smart Glove", and a number of customer testimonials to aid us in our determination. FACTS: The merchandise under consideration, designated as a "Smart Glove", is made from two layers of a knit fabric which is 90 percent cotton and 10 percent spandex. This fabr
Cite this ruling
CBP Ruling 967345 (6116926440): Request for Reconsideration of New York Ruling Letter F82426, dated February 22, 2000, on the Tariff Classification of a "Smart Glove" wrist support Dear Dr. MacMorran: This is in reply to your letter of October 10, 2004, requesting reconsideration of New York Ruling Letter F82426, dated February 22, 2000, classifying your product described as a "Smart Glove" wrist support in subheading 6116.92.6440, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States Annotated (HTSUSA), as a fingerless mitt. You assert that the "Smart Glove" is an orthopedic wrist support classifiable in either subheading 9021.19.8500, HTSUSA, or subheading 6307.90.9889, HTSUSA. You submitted a sample of the "Smart Glove", a summary of a study performed on the "Smart Glove", and a number of customer testimonials to aid us in our determination. FACTS: The merchandise under consideration, designated as a "Smart Glove", is made from two layers of a knit fabric which is 90 percent cotton and 10 percent spandex. This fabr
Paste this into a product's override reason when citing this ruling as justification for a classification.
Other rulings for HS6 611692
Modification of NYRL 862687 (5/6/91); classification of "Wet Grip" golf glove 6116.92.0800, HTSUSA
The tariff classification of gloves from Korea.
The tariff classification of a cotton knit glove from HongKong.
The tariff classification of a cotton glove from thePhilippines.
The tariff classification of gloves from Korea.