NEW YORK -- The Court of International Trade’s hazy jurisdiction over scope issues is one of the issues that is creating headaches for importers with products that are potentially subject to antidumping and countervailing duties, said CIT Judge Jane Restani at the Court of International Trade Judicial Conference on Dec. 1. An unclear dividing line between Commerce Department and CBP scope responsibilities means that importers that want to protect themselves have to take both routes, by filing a scope ruling request and a protest, in the hope of getting to court to challenge a finding their products are subject to AD/CV duties, said Restani.
While there has been some progress toward an International Trade Data System, the complexity of bringing together a disparate group of governmental bodies with differing statutory requirements continues to present some roadblocks, say government and industry officials. Still, there continues to be significant momentum from President Barack Obama's executive order in February that created a 2016 deadline for finishing ITDS (see 14021928), they said. For instance, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), an agency that is involved in regulating some imports but is far less involved at the border as other agencies, reported some movement on its work with CBP, though its clear there's still much to be done.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Nov. 17-23:
In a vote that reflected differences on the FCC about the agency’s role in the IP transition, the FCC on Friday approved a declaratory ruling that consumer advocates hailed as strengthening the agency’s ability to require approval for the retirement of copper, and also raised a number of questions in a rulemaking notice to guide the agency in dealing with the continued move away from copper.
CBP's Port of Seattle office provided additional guidance for industry on how to deal with port disruptions related to labor contract disputes on the West Coast. The Nov. 19 trade information notice largely reflects the updates from a July CSMS message (here). CBP updated a June 24 guidance (see 14062423) to include more details on how to handle shipments of FDA-regulated products. It also gives 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 following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Nov. 10-16:
International Trade Today is providing readers with some of the top stories for Nov. 10-14 in case they were missed.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Nov. 3-9:
The Alliance of Artists and Recording Companies "lacks any evidence" that in-dash navigation and music systems marketed in General Motors vehicles for the past three years "are capable of reproducing any material objects that qualify as ‘digital musical recordings,’" GM argued in an amended answer and counterclaim to AARC’s allegations that Ford, GM and their suppliers have violated the Audio Home Recording Act (AHRA). That and other factors prove that GM car infotainment systems containing hard drives onto which consumers can upload music from their CDs do not "fall within the scope" of the AHRA, GM said in the amended answer to AARC's complaint (case number 1:14-cv-01271) in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (see 1407310086).
The Alliance of Artists and Recording Companies "lacks any evidence" that in-dash navigation and music systems marketed in General Motors vehicles for the past three years "are capable of reproducing any material objects that qualify as ‘digital musical recordings,’" GM argued in an amended answer and counterclaim to AARC’s allegations that Ford, GM and their suppliers have violated the Audio Home Recording Act (AHRA). That and other factors prove that GM car infotainment systems containing hard drives onto which consumers can upload music from their CDs do not "fall within the scope" of the AHRA, GM said in the amended answer to AARC's complaint (case number 1:14-cv-01271) in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (see 1407310086).