The Ocean Shipping Reform Act (OSRA) will take time to implement, and the Federal Maritime Commission still needs companies to bring cases so it can effectively regulate ocean traffic, FMC Chairman Daniel Maffei said Sept. 19 during a panel discussion at the National Customs Brokers & Forwarders Association of America annual Government Affairs Conference.
The Ocean Shipping Reform Act (OSRA) will take time to implement, and the Federal Maritime Commission still needs companies to bring cases so it can effectively regulate ocean traffic, FMC Chairman Daniel Maffei said Sept. 19 during a panel discussion at the National Customs Brokers & Forwarders Association of America annual Government Affairs Conference.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit should allow the U.S. to double its word count in its reply brief in a case on President Donald Trump's move to revoke a tariff exclusion for bifacial solar panels, the U.S. argued in a Sept. 15 brief at the appellate court. The government argued that good cause exists for their motion since it must reply to the issue of presidential authority raised by the appellees along with several alternative problems, and because the importance of the issues in question warrant an enlargement of the word count (Solar Energy Industries Association v. United States, Fed. Cir. #22-1392).
A text-only order Sept. 15 of the three-judge panel at the Court of International Trade granted the motion for leave filed by three importers to enter into the record of the Section 301 litigation their previously unexpected amicus brief in the Section 301 litigation (see 2209140054). Verifone, Drone Nerds and Specialized Bicycle Components argued in the brief for the lists 3 and 4A tariffs to be vacated for Administrative Procedure Act violations at the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative that remain uncured after the agency filed its Aug. 1 remand determination. The three importers are “interested parties” to the litigation, as they are “individual claimants” among the thousands of Section 301 lawsuits filed, and because they “do business in and with China,” their motion said (In Re Section 301 Cases, CIT #21-00052).
Automated shade machines are neither "curtains" nor " builders' wares" but are complex machines classifiable in the tariff schedule as appliances with individual functions, importer Lutron said in a Sept. 14 complaint to the Court of International Trade (Lutron Electronics v. U.S., CIT #22-00264).
The International Trade Commission has opened two Section 337 investigations on imported audio players and components (ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-1329, -1330). The investigations follow two separate complaints, filed Aug. 9 by Google, which alleged that Sonos' audio players infringed on seven of Google's patents covering speech recognition and hot word detection on multiple devices (see 2208120036). Sonos asked the ITC to merge the complaint with another by Google, which alleged infringement of four separate patents. Alternatively, Sonos asked the commission to consolidate the resulting investigations if and when they are instituted, arguing “significant overlap” between the two complaints (see 2208240043). The commission has so far declined to do so, assigning a separate administrative law judge to each case. The investigation is the latest in a series of ITC and court battles between Google and Sonos.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Importer Katana Racing Could Not Revoke of Statute of Limitations, US Tells CAFC in Unpaid Duty Case
The Court of International Trade was wrong to dismiss the government's case against importer Katana Racing seeking to collect over $5.7 million in unpaid duties due to an expired statute of limitations, the U.S. argued in its Sept. 13 opening brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The government's suit was in fact timely filed since Katana could not revoke its waiver of the statute of limitations, the brief said. The U.S. said no law backs the finding that such a waiver could be revoked and stop the government from filing suit for unpaid duties, and that the trade court's ruling "leads to absurd results" (U.S. v. Katana Racing, Fed. Cir. #22-1832).
The Court of International Trade “bent over backwards” to allow the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative to comply with its Administrative Procedure Act obligations in its imposition of the lists 3 and 4A Section 301 tariffs on Chinese goods when it remanded the duties to the agency for further explanation on the rationale for the actions it took in the context of the comments it received, said an amicus brief filed Sept. 14 in the massive Section 301 litigation from the Retail Litigation Center, CTA, the National Retail Federation and four other trade associations. With USTR’s “non-responsive” answer to the remand order, the time has come for the court “to impose the normal remedy for unlawful agency action” and to vacate the lists 3 and 4A tariffs, it said (In Re Section 301 Cases, CIT #21-00052).
Comments are due to the International Trade Commission by Sept. 23 in a potential case on automated storage and retrieval systems and automated put walls. New Jersey-based warehouse automation company OPEX filed a complaint with the ITC on Sept. 9, alleging Chinese company HC Robotics and Pennsylvania-based Invata imported merchandise, namely the Omnisort and its associated vehicles, that infringed on two of OPEX's patents. The patents cover software systems for automated sorting and retrieval of warehouse items. OPEX has asked the ITC to issue a limited exclusion order, barring all of the respondents’ automated put walls and automated storage and retrieval systems, associated vehicles, associated control software and component parts thereof that infringe on at least one valid claim of at least one patent as well as cease and desist orders against both respondents.