Jacob Kopnick

The Court of International Trade ordered an in-person oral argument to take place on Nov. 4 to settle a matter in which the Department of Justice alleged that the plaintiff failed to obtain its consent before filing for a statutory injunction against the liquidation of its entries. In a brief on the injunction motion, DOJ said that counsel for Cheng Shin Rubber -- led by Jeffrey Winton of Winton & Chapman -- completely misrepresented its position, declaring that it had the government's consent for the injunction, when it didn't (see 2110250052).

The Commerce Department again dropped its particular market situation adjustment to the sales-below-cost test in an antidumping review, despite continuing to find that a PMS existed during the review. Dropping the adjustment in Oct. 29 remand results at the Court of International Trade, Commerce said it fulfilled the terms of its voluntary remand request in the case, explaining that the court ruled in other cases that the agency is not allowed to make such an adjustment when finding normal value (NEXTEEL Co., Ltd. v. United States, CIT #20-03868).

Importer BASF Corporation filed five complaints at the Court of International Trade on Oct. 28, challenging CBP's tariff classification of three of its vitamins and supplements. For two of the three substances, BASF is seeking classification under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 2936.

Importer TCW Trends resumed litigation in its case filed in 2012 at the Court of International Trade over the rate of duty paid on its men's knit tops and pants imports. Filing a complaint on Oct. 29, TCW said that its tops and pants were made in a Qualifying Industrial Zone in Alexandria, Egypt, making the goods eligible for preferential duty-free treatment under General Note 3(a)(v) of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule. The entries were liquidated under HTS subheading 6103.43.15 and 6105.20.20. Ultimately, CBP's finding that the merchandise didn't meet the duty-free eligibility requirements under the QIZ program was contrary to law, the complaint said (TCW Trends, Inc. v. United States, CIT #12-00166).

The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:

Chinese appliance manufacturer Gree Electric Appliances Inc. and two of its subsidiaries pleaded guilty to failing to tell the Consumer Product Safety Commission that millions of its dehumidifiers it sold to U.S. customers were defective and could catch fire, the Department of Justice said. Resolving the first corporate criminal enforcement actions ever brought under the Consumer Product Safety Act, Gree entered into a deferred prosecution agreement, agreeing to pay a total penalty of $91 million and provide restitution for any uncompensated victims of fires caused by the dehumidifiers.

Importer and jewelry distributor Gunther Mele Limited fought for its preferred classification of its custom jewelry boxes, in an Oct. 28 complaint at the Court of International Trade. Arguing that CBP previously liquidated many of its jewelry boxes at its preferred rate, Gunther Mele also said that the clear make up of the boxes should qualify them for the importer's preferred tariff classification.

The Commerce Department's recent decision in a separate investigation that it can actually verify non-use of China's Export Buyer's Credit Program appeared in litigation over a separate countervailing duty review via two sets of Oct. 29 comments on remand results filed at the Court of International Trade. The lead plaintiff in the case, Guizhou Tyre Co., attacked Commerce's decision to continue applying adverse facts available relating to the EBCP, given this reversal. The consolidated plaintiffs in the case, led by the China Manufacturers Alliance, in their own comments, argued that Commerce "has expended enormous resources and time in this action defending a position that it has itself discredited" (Guizhou Tyre Co. Ltd. v. United States, CIT #19-00032).

Importer Target General Merchandise filed a complaint at the Court of International Trade, arguing against CBP's analysis of the composition of its glitter/fabric ballet shoes. Target says the shoes should have been classified under a lower duty tariff provision for footwear with textile bottoms.

Importer Sakar International Inc. filed four complaints at the Court of International Trade on Oct. 28 to challenge the classification of its smartphone and tablet covers. Made predominantly of plastic or silicone, the covers were classified by CBP under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheadings 4202.92.45, 4202.92.90 or 4202.99.90, dutiable at either 17.6% or 20%.