The Court of International Trade will allow Moen to end its lawsuit over what the company said were misclassified showerheads despite the Department of Justice's objections, CIT said in a July 26 ruling. Moen, which sued CBP in 2015 over the classification of the goods, filed a motion to dismiss because the goods at issue are now subject to the Section 301 25 percent tariffs on imports from China. The DOJ fought the motion because of the already expended time and resources and because Moen will "likely litigate the correct classification of its showerheads if and when goods classifiable under its claimed tariff provision are no longer subject to the 301 duties.”
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.
Printed circuit assemblies (PCAs) imported as components of industrial robot controllers are classifiable as parts for electricity control boards and panels, and not as parts of automatic data processing machines, the Court of International Trade said in a decision issued July 26. The importer, FANUC, had argued the PCAs have data processing functions, but CIT held that a rule against classification as ADPs for machines with a specific function other than data processing also applies to ADP parts.
The Court of International Trade on July 22 denied a challenge from a tobacco product importer of CBP’s procedure for weighing its tobacco products, finding the agency’s “indirect method” that included the weight of additives to be legally and scientifically valid.
The Court of International Trade was mistaken in its decision on whether the CIT could consider a legal challenge before a protest was actually denied, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said in a July 22 ruling. The CAFC reversed and remanded the CIT's decision to allow the protest lawsuit to go forward under the residual jurisdiction in 28 USC 1581(i) (see 1711090037). "Importers such as Hymer should not be permitted to rest on artful or creative pleadings to expand the jurisdictional scope of § 1581(i), which Congress limited as a statutory basis for the CIT’s jurisdiction over protests," CAFC said.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of July 8-14:
The Court of International Trade is considering changes to its rules that would update how CBP files required information following a summons, CIT said in a June 27 notice. The amendments to Rule 73.1 "were recommended by the Court's Advisory Committee on Rules," it said. The amendments are meant to make the rules less confusing and improve consistency, the advisory committee said. Comments are due July 29.
CBP correctly classified the WeeRide Carrier, which allows kids to ride on adult bikes in a seat between the adult seat and the handlebars, as a bike accessory, the Court of International Trade said in a July 9 ruling. The importer, Kent International, argued that the product is properly classified as “Seats (other than those of heading 9402), whether or not convertible into beds, and parts thereof: … Other seats: Of rubber or plastics: … Other” under HTSUS subheading 9401.80.40, which is duty free.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of July 1-7:
Nearly 50 organizations, individuals and countries weighed in with the Commerce Department on its proposal to incorporate an analysis of currency distortion in countervailing duty cases (see 1905240035). Some lawyers and organizations said that the proposal cannot survive a World Trade Organization challenge, that there is no consensus on how to determine government-influenced currency distortion, and that the respective responsibilities of Treasury and Commerce in the proposed rule is not clear.
Strings of lights imported by Target are not classifiable as lights for Christmas trees, the Court of International Trade said in a July 2 decision. Overturning CBP’s classification, the court found Target’s lighting sets aren’t meant for Christmas trees because they don’t have green wiring and are advertised for Halloween or for general use.