The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Aug. 3-9:
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.
An importer of apparel warehoused in Canada does not have enough documentation for its entries to qualify for duty-free entry as previously imported goods exported under agreement and re-imported under subheading 9801.00.20, the Court of International Trade said in a decision issued Aug. 7.
The Commerce Department must reconsider its decision to deny an importer’s requests for exclusions from Section 232 steel tariffs, and flesh out the scant rationale the agency offered alongside the denials, the Court of International Trade said in an Aug. 5 decision.
The Commerce Department is amending countervailing duty cash deposit rates for some exporters subject to CV duties on aluminum foil from China (C-570-054), it said in a notice implementing a recent Court of International Trade decision that invalidated rates the agency set in the antidumping duty final determination and order it issued in 2018 (see 1804180016). Commerce is lowering rates for Zhongji and the “all others” companies as a result of the decision. Changes announced in the notice, released Aug. 5, are applicable to entries on or after April 3, 2020, as follows:
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of July 27-Aug. 2:
The Court of International Trade on July 31 dismissed a challenge to an ongoing Enforce and Protect Act investigation of antidumping duty evasion, finding the importer must wait for the EAPA investigation to conclude before the court can have jurisdiction to decide the lawsuit.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of July 20-26:
Correction: The Court of International Trade's denied protest jurisdiction isn’t relevant in Trebbianno's lawsuit seeking refunds of Section 301 tariffs because the exclusions were not a CBP decision (see 2007270051), said Chris Kane of Simon Gluck, who represents Trebbianno, in a post on LinkedIn.
An importer has filed suit at the Court of International Trade seeking refunds on Section 301 tariffs based on exclusions issued after the relevant entries liquidated. Trebbianno, which does business as Showroom 35, seeks refunds of $270,040.90 in duties it paid on its imports of handbags, wallets and purses that were subsequently included under retroactive exclusions issued by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of July 13-19: