Electrical conduit imported by Atkore Steel Components is not subject to antidumping duties on malleable cast iron pipe fittings from China (A-570-881), the Commerce Department said in a notice implementing a recent Court of International Trade decision. Though the agency had originally found Atkore’s pipe was covered because it met the physical description of the scope (see 1703200026), CIT in a decision issued in May ordered Commerce to reconsider its scope ruling in light of the ambiguous definition of “pipe” and certain minimum pressure requirements that indicated covered pipe must be for conveying liquids or gases (see 1805160053). In response, Commerce found the conduit no longer in scope, and CIT sustained that new finding in a decision issued Aug. 3. Once the 60-day period for appeals runs out, or if the decision is appealed and affirmed, Commerce will end suspension of liquidation and cash deposit requirements for Atkore’s pipe. In the meantime, it will direct CBP to lower the cash deposit rate for Atkore’s conduit to zero, the agency said.
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 Aug. 20-26:
CBP could begin processing drawback claims as soon as October if all goes according to the plans of a group of customs brokers and importers challenging CBP’s failure to meet a February deadline, said John Peterson of Neville Peterson, who represents those brokers and importers in the case at the Court of International Trade.
The National Marine Fisheries Service is issuing in the Federal Register a notice detailing new Certification of Admissibility requirements for fish imported from Mexico under more than 70 Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheadings. The new requirement implements a court-ordered injunction against the importation of fish and shellfish caught in Mexican fisheries using gillnets (see 1807260039). Though CIT on Aug. 14 said the ban was effectively immediately (see 1808140013), certification requirements outlined in the NMFS notice take effect for imports beginning Aug. 24.
Auto parts and tools exported by Porsche Motorsport North America for sale to teams at car races may be eligible for duty-free re-entry as “tools of the trade” for temporary use abroad, but more remains to be decided in the tariff classification dispute before a final ruling is issued, the Court of International Trade said in an Aug. 22 decision.
An importer’s lawsuit on CBP’s classification of its purportedly used clothing was dismissed Aug. 21 over its failure to pay just $26 of a total $10,057 duty bill by the time of filing. All duties, taxes and fees must be paid in full before bringing challenges to denied protests, and Dis Vintage’s omission of a small amount of interest charges in its final payment before filing its summons -- it paid the $26 just days later -- means the Court of International Trade has no jurisdiction to hear the case, the court said in its decision.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Aug. 13-19:
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Aug. 16 upheld a ruling by the Court of International Trade that compression leg hosiery imported by Sigvaris does not qualify for duty-free treatment as articles specially designed for use by the handicapped, despite finding fault with the reasoning in the lower court’s decision.
Imported artichoke antipasto and green olive tapenade meet the classification requirements of "sauces," the Court of International Trade said in an Aug. 16 decision that went against CBP. The suit involved supermarket brands of the antipasto and tapenade imported by Mondiv. The company challenged a 2015 CBP ruling that said the products don't meet the requirements for a sauce (see 1511300011).
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Aug. 6-12: