Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
The Ocean Shipping Reform Implementation Act, a follow-up bill to OSRA from original co-sponsors Rep. Dusty Johnson, R-S.D., and Rep. John Garamendi, D-Calif., passed 58-1 out of the House Transportation Committee May 23.
The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Court of International Trade granted importer DSM Food Specialties USA's voluntary bid to dismiss its case challenging the classification of its CaroCare beta-carotene in 30% oil suspension form. The company filed suit in 2005 to argue that the imports should be classified under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 2936.90.000, free of duty, rather than subheading 2106.90.9998, dutiable at 6.4% (DSM Food Specialties USA v. United States, CIT # 05-00043).
Five affiliated Manhattan telemarketing entities agreed to pay Pennsylvania $250,000 to settle allegations they inundated Pennsylvanians with hundreds of thousands of unwanted robocalls (see 2211030056), said a consent petition for final decree filed Thursday (docket 2:22-cv-01551) in U.S. District Court for Western Pennsylvania in Pittsburgh. U.S. District Judge Nicholas Ranjan signed an order Thursday approving the petition and closing the case.
The Court of International Trade should dismiss a government counterclaim of unpaid duties in a classification case on dried botanicals imported by Second Nature Designs because DOJ pointed to no authority that gave it a cause of action to assert a claim to collect duties in excess of those assessed during final liquidation, Second Nature said in a May 17 brief in support of its motion to dismiss the counterclaim (Second Nature Designs v. U.S., CIT # 18-00131).
The U.S.'s customs penalty suit against importer Wanxiang America Corp., a U.S. subsidiary of a Chinese manufacturing company, is a "money grab, plain and simple," Michael Roll, counsel for WXA, said during oral argument at the Court of International Trade on May 17. Roll said that because the U.S. is only seeking a penalty for WXA's entries from a company with a 92.84% dumping rate and not entries made before or after the ones at issue from a company with a zero percent rate, it is clear the government is trying to "grab the money" (United States v. Wanxiang America Corp., CIT # 22-00205).
A series of export control indictments announced this week, including several for illegal shipments to China and Russia, only scratched the surface of prosecutions expected to be brought as part of the new Disruptive Technology Strike Force, said Matthew Axelrod, the Bureau of Industry and Security's top export enforcement official. “It’s just the beginning,” Axelrod said during a May 17 law conference hosted by the American Bar Association, Mayer Brown and American University. “I think you can expect to continue to see actions come out from the strike force as this work continues.”
Chief U.S. District Judge Susan Hickey for Western Arkansas in El Dorado granted the unopposed motion from TikTok and ByteDance to stay their Tuesday deadline to respond to Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin’s (R) fraud allegations, pending Griffin’s anticipated motion to remand the case to Union County Circuit Court where it originated, said Hickey’s signed order Monday (docket 1:23-cv-01038). Good cause exists for granting the motion, said the order, setting June 8 as the deadline for Griffin to file his motion to remand. If the court denies the motion to remand, Griffin will get 30 days to amend his complaint, and TikTok and ByteDance will have 30 days after the filing of the amended complaint “to file their responsive pleadings,” said the order. If the court denies the motion for remand and Griffin doesn’t want to amend his complaint, TikTok and ByteDance will then have 30 days after the denial to file their responsive pleadings to Griffin’s “original, unamended complaint,” it said. Griffin alleges TikTok’s U.S. privacy policy is misleading because it doesn’t alert the public to TikTok’s ability to share personal data with individuals or entities in China (see 2305100036). The complaint asserts seven claims under the Arkansas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, and seeks a permanent injunction to compel TikTok to cease its allegedly false and deceptive statements and omissions about the risk of access to and exploitation of consumers’ content and data by Beijing and the Chinese Communist Party.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade: