Court of International Trade

The Court of International Trade on Sept. 8 dismissed an importer’s challenge to CBP’s liquidation of entries subject to antidumping duties. Carbon Activated, an importer of activated carbon, said the entries were improperly liquidated and should have still been subject to suspension of liquidation. It argued the deadline for filing suit ran from the date it found out about the errant liquidations four years later. But CIT, holding that as an importer Carbon Activated was required to keep tabs on the status of its entries, said the company should have seen the liquidation, filed a protest within 180 days, and challenged the denied protest. With the relevant deadlines long past, the court found it couldn’t hear the case.

President Barack Obama sent to the Senate on Sept. 8 the nomination of Jeanne Davidson as a judge on the Court of International Trade, the White House said. Davidson currently serves as director of the International Trade Field Office in the Commercial Litigation Branch of the Civil Division at the Justice Department, as well as the offices of Foreign Litigation and International Legal Assistance. Obama revealed his intent to nominate Davidson in mid-August (see 14081821).

The Court of International Trade on Sept. 2 granted an importer’s request for referral to mediation of a misclassification penalty claim, despite objections from the government. Tenacious Holdings, formerly known as Ergodyne Corp., asked for “court-annexed mediation” to settle the case. The government opposed, arguing that Tenacious had only filed the request to avoid a deadline to provide certain documents in discovery. CIT decided that there is no downside to mediation in the case, and it may be the best way to resolve the dispute given the small dollar amount at issue.

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Aug. 25-31:

A court challenge may be brewing on CBP’s controversial decision to prohibit the filing of protests to claim duty preferences under several free trade agreements, say customs lawyers. A lawsuit could soon be brought by an importer denied the ability to claim preferences by the new policy, although that would require the importer have enough money at stake to justify filing suit, said several lawyers. Another lawyer proposes that importers and trade groups band together to challenge the policy in its entirety as an illegally-issued regulation. Pressure against the change could also come from countries with agreements that are affected by the change, as well as smaller importers that make their voices heard at CBP headquarters.

President Barack Obama plans to nominate Jeanne Davidson as a judge on the Court of International Trade (CIT), the White House said Aug. 18. Davidson currently works at the Justice Department as director of the International Trade Field Office in the Commercial Litigation Branch of the Civil Division, as well as the offices of Foreign Litigation and International Legal Assistance, the White House said. She is also president of the Federal Circuit Bar Association (FCBA). In the early 1990s, Davidson served as associate general counsel at the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative. If confirmed, she will take an open spot created by the recent retirement of CIT Judge Donald Pogue (see 14062422).

Antidumping duty rates for eight exporters of multilayered wood flooring from China (A-570-970) look like they may change again, after the Court of International Trade on Aug. 14 granted a request for voluntary remand from the Commerce Department. In response to a series of court rulings, Commerce had revised the rates it assigned during the original investigation to “separate rate” Chinese exporters that had demonstrated eligibility for their own AD rates but were too numerous to be individually investigated (see 14040104). But just after it was to submit its latest recalculation, Commerce had a change of heart and now wants to look into the possibility of giving individual AD rates to Fine Furniture (Shanghai); Changzhou Hawd Flooring Co., Ltd.; Dunhua City Jisen Wood Industry Co., Ltd.; Dunhua City Dexin Wood Industry Co., Ltd.; Dalian Huilong Wooden Products Co.; Kunshan Yingyi-Nature Wood Industry Co., Ltd.; Armstrong Wood Products (Kunshan) Co., Ltd.; and Karly Wood Product Limited. The court ordered Commerce to submit the results of its inquiry by Oct. 14.

Use can be considered when interpreting “eo nomine” tariff provisions, said the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Aug. 4 as it vacated a lower court ruling on the classification of screws. The Court of International Trade had found screws imported by GRK Canada to be “self-tapping screws” instead of “wood screws”, in part because the description “wood screws” refers to a type of screw by name, and not to the intended use of the screws. But without reaching a verdict on where GRK’s screws should be classified, CAFC found that wood screws means “screws for use in wood,” and ordered CIT to reconsider its decision under the new interpretation.

Antidumping duty rates may change for certain exporters of lined paper products from India (A-533-843), after the Court of International Trade on July 22 ordered the Commerce Department to reconsider the 11.01% rate it assigned to 51 non-individually reviewed companies in its 2010-11 administrative review. CIT found Commerce didn’t justify its decision to include penalty rates for non-cooperative companies in the average rate. Any changes would affect assessment rates for entries of lined paper products between September 2010 and August 2011 from Navneet Publications (India) Ltd., Marisa International, Super Impex, Pioneer Stationery Pvt. Ltd., SGM Paper Products, Lodha Offset Limited, and Magic International Pvt. Ltd. Current AD duty cash deposit rates could also change for Marisa, Super Impex, Pioneer, SGM, Lodha and Magic because they have not received new rates in intervening reviews.

A bonded carrier of merchandise imported under a transportation and exportation entry is only responsible for ensuring delivery, but CBP may ask for documents showing exportation in order to prove the merchandise was delivered, said the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on July 28 as it affirmed a judgment against C.H. Robinson. The carrier had been ordered by the Court of International Trade in 2012 to pay $106,407.86 in unpaid duties, taxes and interest for a shipment of wearing apparel from China that was allegedly diverted into the U.S. while en route to Mexico. The Appeals Court agreed that the CF 7512s stamped by a Laredo customs broker at an unmonitored CBP facility aren’t enough to prove C.H. Robinson fulfilled its responsibility to deliver the merchandise.