The FTC could hold a de-identification workshop in the next 12 months, with a follow-up staff report, said former Consumer Protection Bureau Chief David Vladeck in an interview. Enforcement actions for breaking de-identification promises could follow in the coming years, said Vladeck, Georgetown Law professor and co-director of its Institute for Public Representation. It has been two years since the FTC privacy report, perhaps the commission’s major statement on de-identification, observers said. With research rapidly advancing in the two years since, de-identification experts told us it’s time for the FTC to step up its guidance, and possibly enforcement, role.

The FTC could hold a de-identification workshop in the next 12 months, with a follow-up staff report, said former Consumer Protection Bureau Chief David Vladeck in an interview. Enforcement actions for breaking de-identification promises could follow in the coming years, said Vladeck, Georgetown Law professor and co-director of its Institute for Public Representation. It has been two years since the FTC privacy report, perhaps the commission’s major statement on de-identification, observers said. With research rapidly advancing in the two years since, de-identification experts told us it’s time for the FTC to step up its guidance, and possibly enforcement, role.

The Eastern New York U.S. District Court on July 31 dismissed a lawsuit brought by a New England furniture store against its customs broker for gross negligence when filing entry documentation. Cardi’s Furniture said FedEx Trade Networks ignored its instructions to list a furniture wholesaler as importer of record on an entry. FedEx countered that Cardi’s was only trying to evade antidumping duties on wooden bedroom furniture from China. The court found that it didn’t have to decide, because FedEx was protected by a contract clause that limited entry-related lawsuits to 75 days after the date of liquidation.

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of July 28 - Aug. 3:

CBP has no plans to change policy regarding post-entry free trade agreement (FTAs) preference claims filed before liquidation, despite some industry speculation otherwise, said the CBP Office of International Trade. A recent publication from law firm Drinker Biddle said CBP headquarters is in the process of changing policy to discontinue the use of some post-import preference claims. According to Drinker Biddle lawyers James Sawyer and Beata Spuhler (here), CBP "has indicated that the ability to file Protests, and potentially [Post Entry Amendments (PEAs)], in order to claim eligibility under certain Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) may be prohibited due to a policy change within the agency."

Increased use of Chinese data to verify the true exporter of merchandise could make it tougher for Chinese exporters to engage in “funneling” schemes used to enter product at lower antidumping and countervailing duty cash deposit rates. The longstanding use of "funneling" involves one Chinese exporter using another exporter’s lower cash deposit rate by falsely claiming the latter exported the goods. Although often times non-resident shell companies are on the U.S.-end of such transactions, legitimate importers need to be careful they don’t get caught up in the schemes, some customs lawyers said. The consequence could be a drastic increase in the importer’s duty liability if the Commerce Department finds out.

The Minnesota U.S. District Court on July 9 let an importer’s lawsuit against a sourcing agent to proceed, dismissing its breach of contract claim because it was filed too late but allowing claims related to fraudulent misrepresentation. Liberty Diversified International imported and sold hand trucks from China under its Safco trade name. When the hand trucks became subject to antidumping duties of over 300 percent, it asked its Hong Kong-based sourcing agent, Denson International, to shift production to a factory with a lower rate. But Liberty says it later found out Denson lied about where it was getting the hand trucks, costing it nearly $2 million in duties and customs penalties.

Customs protests must be unambiguously identified as protests, said the Court of International Trade on July 10 as it dismissed a tugboat operator’s bid for preferential duties on a vessel returned after foreign repair. Puerto Rico Towing & Barge Co. argued that a letter its lawyer sent to a CBP vessel repair specialist was an official protest, despite not having been submitted on CBP Form 19. But CIT found that the letter didn’t include certain information required on protests, and made statements that appeared to indicate that it wasn’t intended as a protest at all. A subsequently filed CF 19 filed by PR Towing came too late, apparently as a result of a misunderstanding over the applicable deadline for protests, so the company had no basis for its lawsuit, said CIT.

CBP provided additional guidance for industry in the event of possible port disruptions related to labor contract disputes on the west coast, in a CSMS message sent July 3 (here). The update to a guidance issued on June 24 (see 14062423) includes more details on how to handle shipments of FDA-regulated products. It also includes new information for customs brokers whose shipments have been diverted to another district where the broker is unpermitted, updates procedures for cargo diverted to another west coast port, and says part of CBP’s plan is to “provide front-of-the-line benefits and priority processing to partners in the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT) program.”

The U.S Supreme Court’s decision on Aereo (CD June 26 p1) may have a bigger effect on new technology than majority opinion author Justice Stephen Breyer intended, especially for tech related to TV, said representatives from several trade associations in interviews. By saying companies with an end-product that resembles cable TV should be treated similarly to cable TV by copyright law, the court’s opinion is likely to chill investment interest in tech that appears to deliver a similar product to cable, said American Cable Association President Matt Polka. ACA filed a brief in the case in support of Aereo. “This is not a good thing for consumers,” Polka said: The decision “really calls into question the ability of companies to innovate.” Aereo said over the weekend it’s shutting its service. (See separate report in this issue.)