The Court of International Trade “will remain open to business” for the time being, despite the ongoing partial federal government shutdown, it said in a notice on its website on Jan. 8. CIT “will be staffed to provide all normal judicial business functions until further notice from the court,” it said. “All filing deadlines will remain in effect and [the Case Management/Electronic Case Files system] CM/ECF will remain operational for filing of all documents.”
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 Dec. 31 - Jan. 6:
An importer of garage door openers recently won a court order barring CBP from excluding its products for patent infringement despite a redesign. In a decision released to the public Jan. 2, the Court of International Trade found CBP probably ruled incorrectly when it said a Section 337 exclusion order still applied to One World Technologies’ redesigned cordless garage door openers, issuing a preliminary injunction that stops CBP from blocking any entries under the ruling.
Further litigation over the final drawback rules under the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act is widely expected, with the most likely target being the provisions on drawback for excise taxes, according to multiple lawyers watching the issue closely. One lawyer mentioned ongoing discussions with tobacco firms to file a lawsuit over the excise tax issue, while the wine industry, which could see an end to more than $50 million in annual refunds, would be another likely litigant. The so-called "double drawback" for excise taxes is the most obvious piece to be challenged, but there are some other issues that could face legal scrutiny.
International Trade Today is providing readers with some of the top stories for Dec. 24-28 in case they were missed.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Dec. 24-30:
Six entries of stainless steel plate in coils (SSPC) imported in 1999 from Belgium that were subject to antidumping and countervailing duty orders were deemed liquidated by operation of law, Court of International Trade Judge Kenton Musgrave said in a Dec. 21 ruling. The importer, Arbed Americas, LLC, sued CBP over the 2011 liquidation of the entries. Those entries were caught up in a separate lawsuit that resulted in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit suspending liquidation of all entries of SSPC from Belgium and remanding a denied preliminary injunction back to CIT.
Bonds covering antidumping duties were not retroactively declared invalid by a 2006 law that temporarily suspended the option to post bonds instead of cash deposits for goods subject to new shipper reviews, the Court of International Trade said in a Dec. 14 decision. Hartford Fire Insurance had argued it didn’t owe CBP uncollected duties on entries of fresh garlic from China because the Pension Protection Act, passed in August 2016, retroactively nullified existing bonds going back to April of that year. The trade court disagreed, finding the law’s retroactive application only barred importers from relying on new bonds instead of cash deposits for entries subject to new shipper reviews. Existing bonds issued before the law was enacted remained in effect, it said. “In sum, the PPA does not alter the status of bonds already lawfully filed with Customs, or the ability of Customs to collect against those bonds,” CIT said. The Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015 has since permanently ended the bond option in new shipper reviews (see 1606070008).
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Dec. 17-23:
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Dec. 10-16: