Trade Groups Say Exclusion Order on Laser-Abraded Denim Would Freeze Out Jean Imports
A recently requested Section 337 ban on imports of laser-abraded denim would have a “tremendous detrimental impact” on the U.S. apparel and retail industries, said several industry groups in comments submitted to the International Trade Commission on Sept. 2. Because of the difficulty of distinguishing jeans that are given a distressed look by laser abrasion from jeans treated with another method like sandblasting, the ban would effectively prevent all imports of distressed-style jeans, said the American Apparel & Footwear Association, National Retail Federation, Retail Industry Leaders Association, and United States Fashion Industry Association in joint comments on public interest factors raised by RevoLaze’s Aug. 18 complaint.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
RevoLaze and its subsidiary TechnoLines allege that about 20 companies, including The Gap and Levi Strauss, are importing denim that infringes its patented laser abrasion technology (see 14082210). They are requesting a general exclusion order, so the ban would hit all importers, not just the ones identified by the company in its request for a Section 337 investigation. But RevoLaze is targeting the wrong companies, said the AAFA, NRF, RILA and USFIA. It should be going after the companies that make the purportedly infringing laser abrasion equipment. Instead, RevoLaze’s is requesting a Section 337 investigation on companies that are “merely purchasers of finished apparel products and therefore are not directly responsible for any of the violations being claimed."
If a general exclusion order is issued, CBP would have no way of effectively enforcing it, said the industry groups. No industry test method exists that can be used to determine what process was used to create a distressed effect on denim, meaning CBP may resort to overbroad enforcement to ensure they catch any imports that infringe RevoLaze patents. “An import restriction that is intended to target certain processes would have the risk of being an import restriction on the ‘look’ itself,” said the apparel and retail groups.
A blanket ban on laser-abraded denim would also be detrimental to public health, said the trade associations. Members of the AAFA, NRF, RILA and USFIA are working to eliminate the use of sandblasting for finishing denim because the practice can be harmful to the lungs of garment workers. “ A broad import restriction may significantly restrict the use of alternative technology, which would chill efforts to remove harmful sandblasting techniques and encourage a return to the use of sandblasting, creating a serious risk to the health of workers,” said the trade groups. “Such a result would have an unacceptable impact on the health and safety of garment workers throughout the world,” they said.