The International Trade Commission is beginning a Section 337 investigation on allegations that imported dermatological treatment devices infringe patents held by Serendia, the ITC said in a notice (ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-1356). In a March 1 complaint, Serendia said 15 companies are importing and selling merchandise that copies its patented methods and items for treating skin tissue using bipolar electrodes in portable devices. The ITC will consider whether to issue a limited exclusion order and cease and desist orders against the following respondents to the investigation:
Ben Perkins
Ben Perkins, Assistant Editor, is a reporter with International Trade Today and its sister publications, Trade Law Daily and Export Compliance Daily, where he covers sanctions, court rulings, and other international trade issues. He previously worked as a trade analyst for a Washington D.C. advisory firm. Ben holds a B.A. in English from the University of New Hampshire and an M.A. in International Relations from American University. Ben joined the staff of Warren Communications News in 2022.
A listing of recent Commerce Department antidumping and countervailing duty messages posted to CBP's website March 31, along with the case number(s) and CBP message number, is provided below. The messages are available by searching for the listed CBP message number at CBP's ADCVD Search page.
On March 31, FDA posted new and revised versions of the following Import Alerts on the detention without physical examination of:
Electronic goods with Chinese components such as notebooks, laptops and modems reimported to the U.S after undergoing repairs in Mexico are still subject to Section 301 tariffs on the repairs, even though the repairs are duty free under USMCA, CBP said in a February ruling.
The statute of limitations in customs penalties runs from the date of entry, not from the date that the importer directed the violation to be committed, the Court of International Trade said in a March 31 decision that denied a motion to dismiss a fraud case against Florida businessman Zhe "John" Liu (U.S. v. Zhe "John" Liu, CIT # 22-00215).
CBP’s interpretation of the drawback statute and programming of its ACE Drawback Module led to an "absurd" rejection of substitution unused merchandise drawback eligibility for an importer of civil aviation equipment that disregards the basic structure of the tariff schedule, Spirit Aerosystems said in a March 24 motion for summary judgment at the Court of International Trade (Spirit Aerosystems v. U.S., CIT # 20-00094).
CBP can confer classification "treatment" on a good through consistent decisions at a single port, the Court of International Trade ruled March 24. Finding importer Kent International's imported child safety seats for bicycles should be classified as seats rather than bicycle parts, Judge Leo Gordon agreed with Kent that the Port of New York/Newark's consistent classification of them as seats constituted treatment on a "national basis" because the standard does not require treatment to have been applied at multiple ports, only that CBP not take inconsistent actions over a two-year period.
The International Trade Commission issued a limited exclusion order barring robotic floor cleaning devices made by SharkNinja from importation. The investigation began in January 2021 with a complaint by iRobot, which alleged that SharkNinja imported robotic floor cleaners that infringed on five of iRobot's patents in “lower-quality" imitations (see 2103010021).
The International Trade Commission recently released Revision 2 to the 2023 Harmonized Tariff Schedule, adding four HTS subheadings under chapter 99 to implement Presidential Proclamation 10522 of Feb. 24, "Adjusting Imports of Aluminum Into the United States."
The International Trade Commission issued a notice ending a Section 337 investigation into imported flocked swabs. The commission voted to uphold the administrative law judge's October finding of no violation because complainant Copan failed to prove the technical prong of the domestic industry requirement for patent infringement. Copan originally brought the complaint in September 2021, alleging 26 companies in the U.S., China, Hong Kong and South Korea had violated three of its patents by copying its flocked swabs (see 2109010024).