Importer Sun Ray Group and its owner, Jihua "Mike" Liu, face over $15 million in penalties for alleged fraud and lying on customs forms and underpayment duties on vegetable entries. A complaint at the Court of International Trade filed Dec. 6 by the DOJ says that Liu and Sun Ray avoided duties on 216 entries of dried and dehydrated garlic, onion and other vegetables, and also owe nearly $2 million in unpaid duties (United States v. Jihua "Mike" Liu, CIT #22-00330).
Jacob Kopnick
Jacob Kopnick, Associate Editor, is a reporter for Trade Law Daily and its sister publications Export Compliance Daily and International Trade Today. He joined the Warren Communications News team in early 2021 covering a wide range of topics including trade-related court cases and export issues in Europe and Asia. Jacob's background is in trade policy, having spent time with both CSIS and USTR researching international trade and its complexities. Jacob is a graduate of the University of Michigan with a B.A. in Public Policy.
DOJ briefs in the massive Section 301 litigation don't demonstrate that the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative considered "major objections contemporaneously with its decisions" to impose the lists 3 and 4A tariffs, the plaintiffs argued in a Dec. 5 reply brief at the Court of International Trade. While USTR relies on presidential direction as the post hoc justification of its decisions, the court already ruled that out as a means of satisfying the Administrative Procedure Act, the brief said. To now satisfy the APA, the U.S. may take new action, but the lists 3 and 4A tariffs may not stay in place based on "conclusory and post hoc rationales," the plaintiffs said (In Re Section 301 Cases, CIT #21-00052).
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the weeks of Nov. 21-27 and Nov. 28 - Dec. 4:
Colorado-based Ellab Inc. and its Danish parent company, Ellab A/S, paid the U.S. over $700,000 to settle charges that it failed to pay customs duties on imports of thermal validation equipment, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Colorado announced Dec. 1. The U.S. alleged Ellab failed to classify its imports and properly declare their value, neglecting to pay the full amount of the duties owed on the goods.
CIT Bars Import of Certain Types of Fish From New Zealand, Says Conservation Group Likely to Succeed
The Court of International Trade on Nov. 28 blocked imports of certain fish taken from New Zealand's West Coast North Island multispecies set-net and trawl fisheries. In an opinion that cited renowned conservationist Rachel Carson, Judge Gary Katzmann found plaintiffs are likely to succeed in arguing two claims in the case seeking a Marine Mammal Protection Act ban on imports of fish and fishery products from New Zealand and caught using techniques that have caused the near extinction of the Maui dolphin, warranting the injunction. The injunction covers snapper, tarakihi, spotted dogfish, trevally, warehou, hoki, barracouta, mullet and gurnard from the New Zealand set-net and trawl fisheries.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Nov. 14-20:
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the weeks of Oct. 31 - Nov. 6 and Nov. 7-13:
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Oct. 24-30:
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Oct. 17-23:
It's legal for importer Keirton USA to enter marijuana-related drug paraphernalia into Washington state, the Court of International Trade ruled in an Oct. 20 opinion. Building on the trade court's similar Eteros decision, Judge Claire Kelly said Washington's repeal of past restrictions on marijuana-related drug paraphernalia constitutes an authorization of the manufacture, possession and distribution of these goods, so that importing these goods qualifies for the exemption under the Federal Mail Order Drug Paraphernalia Control Act of 1986. Kelly, like Judge Gary Katzmann in the Eteros decision, relied on the Supreme Court case Murphy v. NCAA to construe the definition of "authorization."