## Facts

- The Pillsbury Company imported Häagen-Dazs frozen dessert bars consisting of a vanilla-flavored frozen yogurt–ice milk core coated with either raspberry sorbet or chocolate sorbet.
- Customs classified the entries under **HTSUS subheading 2105.00.40** (covering, in relevant part, “malted milk and articles of milk or cream”), dutiable at **$0.517/kg + 17.5% ad valorem**.
- Pillsbury filed **four protests** challenging the liquidations and sought classification either under **HTSUS 2105.00.50** (“other” within heading 2105) or **HTSUS 0403.10.90.00** (yogurt), classifications Pillsbury asserted could qualify for **duty-free treatment under NAFTA**.
- Customs denied the protests and confirmed classification under **2105.00.40**.
- Pillsbury sued in the **Court of International Trade**, which held a full trial and upheld Customs’ classification.
- The CIT found the bars were **not predominantly sorbet** and instead were **frozen ice milk intermixed with yogurt**, a mixture the court found **distinguishable from traditional yogurt**.
- Pillsbury appealed to the **United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit**, which had jurisdiction under **28 U.S.C. § 1295(a)(5)**.

## Issues

1. Whether the dessert bars were properly classified under **HTSUS 2105.00.40** rather than under **HTSUS 2105.00.50**.
2. Whether the bars should instead be classified as **yogurt** under **HTSUS 0403.10.90.00**.
3. What standard of review applied to the CIT’s determinations about the nature of the goods and whether the bars were “predominantly sorbet” or a dairy-based frozen dessert.

## Decision

- The Federal Circuit **affirmed** the judgment of the Court of International Trade.
- The court held the bars were properly classified under **HTSUS 2105.00.40**.
- The court upheld, as not clearly erroneous, the CIT’s finding that the bars were **not predominantly sorbet**, but were **frozen ice milk intermixed with yogurt** and **not “traditional yogurt”** for tariff purposes.
- The court rejected Pillsbury’s proposed classifications under **HTSUS 2105.00.50** and **HTSUS 0403.10.90.00**.

## Legal Principles

- Tariff classification follows the **General Rules of Interpretation (GRIs)** and the terms of the HTSUS headings and relevant notes.
- On appeal, the Federal Circuit reviews the **meaning of tariff terms** as a question of law **without deference**.
- Whether the imported merchandise **fits within** the tariff terms—including the trial court’s findings about composition and the product’s character—is reviewed for **clear error**.
- For composite or multi-component foods, courts may consider evidence such as **physical composition, structure, and the product’s overall character**, and they need not treat one factor (such as the exterior coating) as controlling.
- A product containing yogurt as an ingredient is not classified as “yogurt” under heading 0403 when the record supports a finding that the imported good is a **different frozen dairy mixture** from “traditional yogurt.”

## Conclusion

Pillsbury Co. v. United States held that Häagen-Dazs sorbet-coated dessert bars were properly classified under HTSUS 2105.00.40 as articles of milk or cream, not under the residual “other” subheading within heading 2105 and not as yogurt under heading 0403, because the CIT’s trial findings that the bars were not predominantly sorbet and that their core was frozen ice milk mixed with yogurt (distinct from traditional yogurt) were not clearly erroneous.


Pillsbury Co. v. United States, 431 F.3d 1377 (Fed. Cir. 2005).