Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh likely will participate if the Supreme Court is asked to review the FCC net neutrality rollback, said court watchers, noting justices have wide leeway on recusals. They recused themselves without explanation from a November decision not to consider the prior commission's 2015 Communications Act Title II net neutrality order (see 1811050008). Their apparent reasons -- possible conflicts over Roberts' shares and Kavanaugh's lower court participation -- aren't expected to be repeated if the current Republican-run FCC's Title I order comes before them.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Dec. 3-9:
The Court of International Trade on Dec. 7 ruled in favor of an importer challenging increased CBP bonding requirements, finding them unnecessary given the importer’s future import plans and detrimental to the importer’s ability to remain in business. Unusual circumstances related to the importer’s shipments from the previous year, as well as the importer’s practice of withdrawing from a bonded warehouse for consumption, mean the importer’s current continuous bond should be sufficient, CIT said.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Nov. 26 - Dec. 2:
The Court of International Trade on Nov. 29 declined to rule in favor of an importer facing nearly $3.5 million in penalties and unpaid duties based on allegations it fraudulently misclassified and undervalued entries of wearing apparel, sending the case to trial to decide whether the government missed the statute of limitations for customs penalty cases. Greenlight Organic denies the allegations, and also says the government filed its action more than five years after it purportedly found out about the violations. The government says it’s still within the five-year period of when it first obtained double-invoicing records from Greenlight. “More facts are needed to ascertain when the Government first had knowledge of Greenlight’s fraudulent misclassification and undervaluation activities, including when the Government began to suspect a potential double-invoicing scheme and when the Government had knowledge of an intent to defraud with respect to the misclassification of entries,” CIT said. Because more facts are necessary, CIT denied Greenlight’s motion for summary judgment and said Greenlight and the government could submit more evidence on the statute of limitations issue at trial.
A ban on imports of some Mexican seafood will remain in effect, after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Nov. 28 denied a motion to stay the lower court ruling that set the ban. The Court of International Trade in July granted the preliminary injunction (see 1807260039), which bans importation of fish and fish products from Mexican commercial fisheries that use gillnets within the range of the endangered vaquita, amid concerns the fishing practice is driving the porpoise species to extinction. CBP subsequently set certification requirements for Mexican seafood in response to the court order (see 1808290047). Now on appeal, the Federal Circuit said in a one-page, non-precedential decision that the government “has not established that a stay of the order pending appeal is warranted here.” It did, however, leave the door open to a quick resolution of the case. “Given the urgency expressed in the government’s motion and the fact that the government self-expedited the filing of its opening brief, the court notes that it will consider a motion by the government to expedite oral argument in this appeal.”
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Nov. 19-25:
CBP's Trade Remedy Law Enforcement Directorate is investigating several new cases of alleged plywood antidumping and countervailing duty evasion under the Enforce and Protect Act (EAPA) evasion enforcement process (see 1608190014), CBP said in a Nov. 20 notice that was released by law firm Wiley Rein. The investigation is focused on five companies that were alleged to be involved in transshipment and false declarations of Chinese hardwood plywood. "Because the evidence thus far establishes a reasonable suspicion that the Importers have entered merchandise into the United States through evasion, CBP has imposed interim measures," the agency said.
The Port of Laredo should not have rejected a claim for preferential treatment under NAFTA based on the use of the Document Image System, CBP said in the Sept. 14 ruling HQ H300353. The 1520(d) NAFTA preference claim -- also known as a 520(d) claim -- was filed by BASF Corporation in 2017, but the port rejected the claim because CBP stopped accepting DIS in support of protest submissions filed through ACE. BASF filed an application for further review of protest and noted CBP had not provided information on the requirements specifically for post-import NAFTA claims.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Nov. 12-18: