CIT Tosses Customs Case for Plaintiff's Failure to Respond to Counsel
The Court of International Trade in an Oct. 31 order dismissed a customs case after counsel for plaintiff Guangdong Hongteo Technology Co.'s second attempt to withdraw from the proceeding, given Hongteo's failure to respond to its counsel (Guangdong Hongteo Technology Co. v. United States, CIT #20-03776).
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.
Hongteo's counsel, Rock Trade Law, previously tried to withdraw its representation over alleged outstanding legal fees but Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves said that since the plaintiff is a company and not a person, Rock Trade Law could not leave the case without substitute counsel first being identified (see 2207110070). The firm took to the trade court again to try to withdraw its representation of Hongteo, telling the trade court that it received no response from the plaintiff or any possible replacement counsel. Given the lack of response, Rock Trade Law said it has been "unable to provide legal representation" to the plaintiff.
"Plaintiff has not communicated with its current counsel and has shown no interest in continuing with these proceedings," Choe-Groves said. The judge then tossed the case without prejudice. The underlying case concerns the classification of Hongteo's aluminum fuel pump mounts that were liquidated under subheading 8409.91.5085, though Hongteo argued that the mounts should properly be classified under subheading 8302.30.3060.