CamelBak imported backpacks used for outdoor activities and designed to deliver "hands-free" water on-the-go. Each of the subject articles is a textile bag with padded shoulder straps and an insulated plastic reservoir for beverages, flexible tubing, a bite valve, and a cargo compartment designed to hold food, clothing, and supplies. The reservoir holds 35 to 100 ounces of liquid, and the cargo compartment holds 300 to 1,680 cubic inches, depending on the style of pack. Both Customs and CamelBak agreed that the article fell under Heading 4202 for "insulated food or beverage bags ... backpacks ... sports bags." CamelBak believed that the articles should be classified as composite goods under GRI 3b (comprised of a sports bag and insulated hydration component), that the hydration component gave the article its essential character, and therefore the correct subheading was for "insulated food or beverage bags" at a rate of 7 percent. Customs did not think the articles were composite goods and entered them as backpacks under the subheading for "travel, sports and similar bags" at a rate of duty of 17.8 percent. CamelBak filed a protest. The Court of International Trade agreed with Customs, stating that "there is nothing about [adding a beverage compartment] that makes the backpack not a backpack." CamelBak appealed. What was the result? Were these composite goods? If so, how does GRI 3 apply? Or were these just backpacks with an improved design?