The Federal Maritime Commission is preparing for increased enforcement this year as it expects to receive more complaints and hire more investigators as part of a $43.7 million congressional funding request -- an uptick from the nearly $35 million it asked for last year.
The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Federal Maritime Commission is preparing for increased enforcement this year as it expects to receive more complaints and hire more investigators as part of a $43.7 million congressional funding request -- an uptick from the nearly $35 million it asked for last year.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Court of International Trade on March 16 refused to accept a second motion to dismiss from Zhe "John" Liu, a defendant in a penalty case, since it "is not a motion provided for by the rules of the court." Judge Jane Restani ruled that Liu's "excuse" for filing the second motion -- that "something signficant" intervened -- "is not well-taken." The trade court instead accepted Liu's first motion to dismiss, and told Liu to make sure future filings align with court rules (United States v. Zhe "John" Liu, CIT # 22-00215).
Software developers voiced concerns March 16 over whether they can meet a tight April 10 deadline for new country of smelt and cast information on entry summaries for aluminum products (see 2303090060). Speaking on the agency’s bi-weekly ACE trade call, developers urged CBP to develop a “work around” in the event that trade systems aren’t ready on the effective date of the new requirement.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on March 15 rejected a textile company's expedited motion for a temporary injunction that would have required CBP to return its entries of imported coated fabric to unliquidated status or suspend the company's protests. Judge Evan Wallach said the company, Printing Textiles, doing business as Berger Textiles, "failed to persuade the court of the likelihood that jurisdiction under" Section 1581(a) would be manifestly inadequate, establishing jurisdiction under Section 1581(i), as claimed by Berger (Printing Textiles, dba Berger Textiles v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1576).
The Court of International Trade on March 16 upheld the use of a questionnaire instead of on-site verification in the Commerce Department's countervailing duty investigation on aluminum sheet from Turkey. Judge M. Miller Baker said that Commerce "easily" defeated respondent Teknik Aluminyum Sanayi's challenge because Teknik cited no authority requiring the agency to carry out a certain verification procedure during a global pandemic.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Court of International Trade doesn’t have jurisdiction to hear a case involving a textile company’s dispute with CBP, saying the company sought relief under the wrong statute, Judge Timothy Stanceu held in a March 10 opinion. The trade court found Printing Textiles, doing business as Berger Textiles, didn’t show why the denied protest challenge should be filed under Section 1581(i), the court's "residual" jurisdiction, and not Section 1581(a). Berger filed a notice of appeal the next business day.