Timber Products, Co. v. United States

Timber Products, Co. (Timber) (plaintiff) imported plywood into the United States. In its entry documents, Timber described the plywood as made up of a number of different species of tropical hardwood. According to Timber, while virola was a specific species of hardwood, it was a commercial term that also referred to any of 35 different species of tropical hardwood or a mixture of those species. The United States Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (customs) classified Timber’s import as plywood with at least one outer ply of nonconiferous wood under subheading 4412.14.30 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) because Timber’s imports consisted of mixed tropical hardwoods and not solely plywood made from the virola tree. Timber challenged the designation before the United States Court of International Trade, arguing that the plywood should have been classified under subheading 4412.13.40, which applied to plywood with an outer ply of tropical woods like virola. Specifically, Timber argued that customs should have applied not the common meaning of virola, but rather its commercial meaning. During trial, some of Timber’s witnesses testified that virola referred to any of the 35 different species of trees, while others testified that virola was the mixture of those species. While some witnesses said that virola had to be from Brazil, others said it could come from other countries. Another witness testified that the definition of virola had changed over time and was not uniform across the industry. The court entered judgment against Timber, holding that Timber had failed to establish a different commercial meaning for virola. Timber appealed.