The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Oct. 18-24:
Court of International Trade
The United States Court of International Trade is a federal court which has national jurisdiction over civil actions regarding the customs and international trade laws of the United States. The Court was established under Article III of the Constitution by the Customs Courts Act of 1980. The Court consists of nine judges appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate and is located in New York City. The Court has jurisdiction throughout the United States and has exclusive jurisdictional authority to decide civil action pertaining to international trade against the United States or entities representing the United States.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Oct. 11-17:
The Court of International Trade granted the Department of Justice's motion to stay a case challenging the expansion of Section 232 duties on steel and aluminum “derivatives,” in an Oct. 14 order, due in part to the defendant's likelihood of succeeding on appeal. Finding that a recent U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit opinion indicates DOJ's chances of success at the appellate court, CIT also stayed any resulting liquidation but noted that the fact pattern in the present case reads differently from that of the recent Federal Circuit case.
International Trade Today is providing readers with the top stories from Oct. 4-8 in case they were missed. All articles can be found by searching on the titles or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
A customs broker exam taker who is appealing his failing score is asking the Court of International Trade to overturn CBP’s denial of credit for seven questions from the April 2018 test. In a brief filed Oct. 1, Byungmin Chae says CBP erroneously graded his customs broker exam, denying him a broker license on its mistaken finding that he did not score 75 percent or higher.
The Court of International Trade doesn't have jurisdiction over cases in which CBP seized goods, Judge Gary Katzmann ruled in an Oct. 7 order. Instead, jurisdiction in these instances lies exclusively with federal district courts, the judge said. Since the seizure of an import does not deem a product excluded, and thus precludes any protestable event, jurisdiction at CIT is barred for seized goods, the court found.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Sept. 27 - Oct. 3:
The Commerce Department will raise the antidumping duty cash deposit rate in effect for an exporter of frozen warmwater shrimp from India (A-533-840), implementing a recent Court of International Trade decision that ordered Commerce to recalculate rates set in an administrative review completed in 2019 (see 1910280007), it said. As a result of its recalculation, the AD duty cash deposit rate for Milsha Agro Exports Pvt. Ltd. will rise to 6.13% (from 1.87%). The new rate will apply to subject merchandise entered on or after Sept. 30, 2020.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Sept. 20-26:
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Sept. 13-19: