
    No. 44838.
    Protests 962567-G, etc., of N. Minami & Co., Inc. (New York).
   Opinion by

Dallinger, J.

From the exhibit the court was satisfied that the ■electrical element or device therein may not be considered as a nonessential feature in the article and that it constitutes a conspicuous and prominent part of the wreath. On the authority of Minami v. United States (1 Cust. Ct. 307, C. D. 72) the claim at 35 percent under paragraph 353 was sustained.  