THE COUNTRY OF ORIGIN MARKING OF TRAINING SHOES, MISLEADING

NY 801246 September 1, 1994 MAR-2-05:S:N:N8:346 CATEGORY: MARKING RE: THE COUNTRY OF ORIGIN MARKING OF TRAINING SHOES, MISLEADING Mr. John Pellegrini Ross and Hardies 65 East 55 Street New York, NY 10022-3219 DEAR Mr. Pellegrini: This is in response to your letter to ORR, dated 7-21-94, requesting a ruling for Reebok on whether your proposed marking is acceptable. A marked sample was submitted with your letter for review. ORR forwarded your letter and sample to us for our final reply to you. The shoe is marked "MADE IN KOREA" in contrasting color print which is .12 inch high on a label sewn into the middle of inside of the tongue. The label is about 1 inch below the top edge of the tongue, and it also contains the only size information on the shoe itself. You also state the shoes will be sold in shoe boxes, which, per your sample, will be marked on both end panels in print .2 inch high. This marking is acceptable per se. Both the labels and the end panels are also marked "EUR", "U.K." and "USA", referring to the shoe sizes given. These are no problem under CR 134.36 because they are next to a larger and more prominent "MADE IN KOREA". However, as you point out, there is also the word "KENYA" embroidered into the outside back counter of the shoe in print which is .4 inch high. The issue is whether this "KENYA" causes CR 134.36 to apply again. The exceptions in CR 134.37 do not apply since you do not claim the name of the country of Kenya is Reebok's registered trademark and since the shoe is clearly not a souvenir article. You cite several rulings in which Customs has not applied the proximity and equal size requirements of CR 134.36 when it decided that no confusion as to the country of origin was conceivable. However, whether or not that is the case here, ORR recently indicated in HRL 735592 DFC, 7-14-94, that that is not a concept which applies to shoeboxes due to the language of TD 86-129. Since that TD concerned the marking of both shoes and shoeboxes, it is clear the same reasoning applies here. Therefore, your proposed marking is unacceptable. You must either remove the "KENYA" or add a "Made in Korea" in approximately equal sized print where it will be seen in the same glance. This ruling is being issued under the provisions of Part 177 of the Customs Regulations (19 CFR Part 177). A copy of this ruling letter should be attached to the entry documents filed at the time this merchandise is entered. If the documents have been filed without a copy, this ruling should be brought to the attention of the Customs officer handling the transaction. Sincerely, Jean F. Maguire Area Director New York Seaport