本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

cbp-binding-ruling

Drafts U.S. Customs and Border Protection binding ruling requests under 19 CFR Part 177 for tariff classification, valuation, origin, and marking determinations. Trigger when input mentions "binding ruling," "CBP ruling request," "19 CFR Part 177," "classification request," "HTSUS analysis," "transaction value," "country of origin," or "marking for import."

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(2)

  • SKILL.md6.8 KB
  • LICENSE.txt10.5 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

CBP Binding Ruling Request (19 CFR Part 177)

Produces a complete, exhibit-backed binding ruling request package for pre-filing U.S. import treatment decisions on classification, valuation, origin, or marking.

Prerequisites

  1. Confirm the matter is a U.S. import treatment determination appropriate for 19 CFR Part 177.
  2. Identify requesting party's role and authority (importer / prospective importer / foreign manufacturer / authorized representative).
  3. Gather transaction evidence: supply chain docs, technical specs, invoices, contracts, prior entries, prior CBP communications.
  4. Check for related-party pricing, royalty/assist/profit-sharing elements, or prior rulings on similar goods.
  5. Secure signatory authority; confirm POA scope if acting through counsel/broker.
  6. Identify any confidential business information requiring redaction.
  7. Verify no pending protest/litigation or excluded-request conflict with Part 177 scope.

Quick Start

  1. Screen scope and jurisdiction → validate determination type against Part 177 authority.
  2. Draft requester/standing section → collect merchandise record → document transaction chain.
  3. Isolate legal questions (one per issue) → build authority-stack analysis.
  4. Assemble exhibit index → add certification and confidentiality block.
  5. Run quality gates → finalize output in template order.

Workflow

1. Scope and Jurisdiction Screen

Validate request type; flag and reframe non-Part 177 matters to non-binding inquiry.

DeterminationAuthorityRequired Facts
Classification19 CFR Part 177, HTSUS + GRI 1–6Composition, function, process, alternatives rejected
Valuation19 USC 1401a, 19 CFR Part 152Related-party analysis, transfer pricing, royalties/assists/proceeds
Origin/Marking19 CFR Part 102 (or agreement appendices)Manufacturing operations, tariff shift, criteria applied
OtherRelated Part 177 authorityIssue isolation and requested relief [VERIFY]

2. Requester and Standing

  • Full legal name, principal business address, contact person
  • Relationship to merchandise/importation
  • Legal authority basis; POA summary if applicable
  • Distinguish roles when requester ≠ importer of record

3. Merchandise Record

FieldDetail
Product nameCommercial and technical designation
CompositionMaterial IDs and percentages by weight/volume
ProcessStep-by-step transformation from origin materials to finished goods
SpecsWeight, dimensions, capacity, tolerances, performance
UseEnd-user function, market segment, substitutability
StandardsASTM/ISO/FDA/FCC references with citations
SamplesPhotos/specimens plan with exhibit mapping

For classification: state full 10-digit HTSUS with GRI sequencing, Explanatory Notes, and exclusionary analysis.

4. Transaction Structure and History

  • Full supply chain: sourcing → processing → manufacturing → export → shipment → U.S. entry
  • All parties and relationship mapping; flag related-party status under 19 CFR 152.102(g)
  • Pricing: Incoterms, currency/terms, royalties, assists, proceeds of resale
  • Prior import history if any: entry numbers, ports, dates, declared HTSUS/values, audit outcomes, prior rulings with factual changes explained

5. Legal Questions

One question per discrete issue. No compound questions or non-determinative hypotheticals. Sample forms (tailor to facts):

  • Classification: "Whether merchandise is classifiable under subheading [____], HTSUS, as opposed to [alternative], based on [GRI path + facts]."
  • Valuation: "Whether transaction value under 19 U.S.C. 1401a is acceptable where [relationship/royalties/assists] and whether [adjustment] is required under § 1401a(b)(1)(D)."
  • Origin: "Whether country of origin for marking is [country] under 19 CFR Part 102 based on [tariff shift / substantial transformation]."

6. Legal Analysis

Build authority stack table:

IssueControlling AuthoritySupportApplication
ClassificationHTSUS, GRI 1–6HQ/NY rulings, ENsWhy heading is/is not met
Valuation19 USC 1401a; 19 CFR Part 152CBP rulingsTransaction value acceptability + adjustments
Origin/Marking19 CFR Part 102Rulings + technical evidenceWhy origin rule is triggered

Prior rulings: prioritize HQ over NY; distinguish adverse precedent with material differences; flag supersession/revocation before citing.

7. Exhibit Index

ExhibitTypeRelevance
Ex. 1Corporate authorization / POAStanding and signatory authority
Ex. 2Technical specs / engineering dataComposition and manufacturing basis
Ex. 3Samples / photosPhysical characteristics
Ex. 4Commercial docsValue and sale-structure support
Ex. 5Prior rulings / correspondenceHistorical treatment
Ex. 6Expert / lab reportsScientific support

Include certifications for expert reports (identity, qualification, method, date).

8. Certification and Confidentiality

  • Sworn certification: printed name, title, signature, date
  • Confirm signer has authority and factual knowledge or reasonable basis
  • 19 CFR 177.2(b)(7) confidentiality request: itemized identifiers, harm rationale, redaction plan for public version

9. Final Assembly

Template order:

  1. Header and requester identification
  2. Purpose and legal authority
  3. Factual background
  4. Transaction/merchandise description
  5. Issues and questions presented
  6. Applicable law and analysis
  7. Requested determination
  8. Attachments and index
  9. Certification and signatures

Quality Checks

  • Every asserted fact has exhibit support; no unresolved references
  • All citations current; revocation/supersession status verified
  • Questions map one-to-one to requested determinations
  • Routing to proper CBP office confirmed [VERIFY]
  • Uncertain authority marked [VERIFY] before finalization

Pitfalls

  • Scope creep: never include penalty/reasonable-care advisories, litigation strategy, or non-customs policy questions.
  • Compound questions: CBP may decline or partially answer; isolate each issue.
  • Stale rulings: always check revocation/modification status before citing.
  • Unsupported claims: no narrative assertions without source documents; separate facts from analysis.
  • Jurisdiction: U.S. only; flag and adjust when trade-agreement or foreign-law layers apply.

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

中国大陆地区法院类案快速检索与《案件检索报告》(DOCX)生成技能。以案件五项要点(案由/法律关系、争议焦点、关键事实、我方诉请与诉讼地位、请求权基础法条)为检索锚点,经一次四问确认即开工(其中**检索地域范围**与**裁判时间范围**为强制选择题,默认范围为「2021年1月1日以后裁判的浙江省范围内的法院案例」,用户点选默认后须回显该范围提示);按**请求权基础、法律关系、案件事实三要素**判定高匹配——用户**指定**检索特定结果的案例时结果相似度计入评分(四要素满分 10 分),用户**未指定**时结果相似度不作为高匹配考虑因素(三要素满分 8 分);r1 判定须**核对法条版本与时间效力**,援引已失效旧法条者不得给满分;以语义向量检索为主召回、精确结构检索为条件兜底,本地脚本加权打分后按「得分率 > 法院层级 > 审判程序 > 裁判日期」排序,并检测**同院同日同标题的重复入库**案件、疑似重复者不占入报名额;截取匹配度最高的 5–10 例类案,逐案调详情核验案号并摘录判词原文,最后直接输出含页脚页码的 DOCX 报告(默认保存至桌面)。全流程人工确认 1 次、检索类调用控制在 2 次召回 + ≤10 次详情以内,报告阶段检索冻结。未指定结果时三要素高匹配而结果相反者亦会入报(逐例标注结果方向),指定结果时结果相反者一律剔除;报告内以两处固定声明披露「未设不利先例定向检索路径」的局限。当用户要求「快速检索类似案例」「找几个正向案例」「快速版案例检索报告」「检索 5 到 10 个类案并出报告」「出一份类案检索报告 docx」时使用。需要四象限归位、反向案例定向检索、补充召回多轮迭代或 14 分制硬软条件精判时,应使用完整版技能「案例检索报告Plus」而非本技能。基于华宇元典法律数据 MCP。

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

CSlawyer1985/legal-skillhub152026年9月23日 更新

88查企业风险查询与分析工具 —— 专注于中国大陆企业的法务风险查询与分析,覆盖经营异常、行政处罚、监管措施、被执行人、失信被执行人、司法案件等风险类型。支持公司名称、统一社会信用代码、companyId 三种输入方式,自动完成风险查询并输出结构化风险分析总结。 触发场景:仅当用户意图为查询企业风险/法务风险时触发。包括但不限于:企业风险查询、公司风险、经营异常、行政处罚、监管措施、被执行人、失信被执行人、司法风险、风险扫描、风险评估、企业合规审查、风险报告、XX公司有什么风险、XX公司安全吗、XX公司有没有处罚、XX公司被执行过吗。 不触发场景:纯粹的企业信息查询(如查公司、搜企业、工商信息、注册资本、法人代表、股东结构、专利商标等)不应触发本技能,请使用其他 cha88 系列工具。

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

CSlawyer1985/legal-skillhub152026年9月23日 更新

Manages Rule 30(b)(6) corporate representative deposition workflows — drafting notice topics with reasonable particularity, building examination outlines, defending designees, handling objections, and preserving binding admissions for summary judgment or trial. Use when drafting or responding to 30(b)(6) notices, selecting and preparing designees, building topic-by-topic outlines, or triaging scope and privilege disputes. Trigger keywords: 30(b)(6), corporate representative deposition, topic list, designee, notice analysis, deposition objections, corporate admissions.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

CSlawyer1985/legal-skillhub152026年9月23日 更新

Guides taking and defending Rule 30(b)(6) corporate representative depositions. Drafts topic lists with reasonable particularity, builds examination outlines for binding corporate admissions, analyzes noticed topics for objections, and prepares designees. Use when drafting 30(b)(6) notices, preparing corporate deposition topics, selecting or preparing designees, or defending corporate representative depositions.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

CSlawyer1985/legal-skillhub152026年9月23日 更新

Drafts FDA 510(k) Premarket Notification submissions demonstrating substantial equivalence under 21 CFR Part 807. Supports Traditional, Special, and Abbreviated pathways. Use when preparing Class II medical device regulatory filings, substantial equivalence analyses, or FDA premarket submissions.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

CSlawyer1985/legal-skillhub152026年9月23日 更新

Drafts a recordable Abstract of Judgment to create a judgment lien on a debtor's real property. Extracts party names, monetary components, and judgment details from case documents, then applies jurisdiction-specific formatting and certification requirements. Use post-judgment in commercial litigation when enforcing monetary awards, perfecting judgment liens, or preparing lien filings with the county recorder.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

CSlawyer1985/legal-skillhub152026年9月23日 更新

CSlawyer1985 のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する