CIT Rules Surgical Light System a Duty-Free Diagnostic Tool

(U.S. Customs and Border Protection had classified the items under HTS subheading 9405.10.60 at 7.6 percent ad valorem as lamps or light fittings.)

Tumpf Stated Light System Was Diagnostic Tool to Illuminate Part of Patient, Etc.

Between November 2003 and July 2005, Trumpf imported its surgical light systems consisting of a surgical light (i.e. Helion® or Xenion®), and a ceiling mounted moveable arm to which the surgical light was attached. Trumpf stated that its surgical light systems are intended for local illumination of the part of the patient being examined or operated upon in a hospital or in a doctor’s surgery. In addition, Trumpf argued that its lights served diagnostic purposes since they had temperature and lighting features which would not harm the patient during a surgical procedure.

As Light System not Solely Diagnostic, CBP Said just a Specialized Spotlight

Customs did not agree that these light systems were specifically designed for diagnostic purposes and instead considered them to be specialized spotlights. Customs argued that although precision overhead room lighting is necessary for the surgeon to do his or her job, Trumpf’s light system was not solely for diagnostic purposes, because it was not used in direct contact, or even close proximity with the patient. The CIT dismissed this last argument stating the notion of proximity of space is not included in the definition of diagnostic.

CIT States Light System is an Instrument or Appliance as it Performs a Task

The CIT considered the Explanatory Notes to Chapter 94 and noted that medical, diagnostic, probing, irradiation, and other lamps of Heading 9018 were specifically excluded from Heading 9405. The Court then reviewed the Chapter Notes and language of Heading 9018 to determine if the light system could be considered an instrument or appliance classified under that Heading. While the Chapter Notes to Heading 9018 did not define an appliance or instrument, various dictionaries indicated that an instrument or appliance needs only to accomplish one simple task or serve a particular function. Trumpf’s light systems qualified under the broad common meaning of these terms because the light systems performed a specific task.

CIT Rules Light System Is Used by Professionals for Diagnostic Purposes

The Explanatory Notes to Heading 9018 state that instruments and appliances used by doctors to make a diagnosis, to prevent or treat an illness or to operate would be included under this Heading.

The CIT determined that based on the evidence, Trumpf’s light system was designed and clearly used in the vast majority of cases in a medical setting. The Court noted that the illumination provided by Trumpf’s light system met the diagnostic requirement by assisting a health professional to detect the signs or symptoms of a condition or disease.

As Customs presented no evidence to dispute Trumpf’s evidence that its surgical light’s chief use was as an aid to physicians in identifying a disease or illness from the signs and symptoms, the CIT ruled the light system was a diagnostic tool and correctly classified under Heading 9018.90.60.

Parties Told to Review Entries, Seek Court Decision If No Agreement Reached

The CIT directed the parties to review how the subject entries should be classified consistent with the court’s opinion, and if they could not agree, submit statements of their position for the court to decide.

(Slip Op 10-123, dated 10/27/10)