US Asks for Remand in EAPA Case, Says Protective Order Incoming
The U.S. filed a motion to remand an Enforce and Protect Act case in light of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's ruling in Royal Brush Manufacturing v. United States, in which the appellate court said CBP violated an EAPA party's due process rights by not granting them access to business confidential information. Filing the Sept. 14 motion in a Court of International Trade case filed by importer Newtrend USA Co., the government claimed that a limited remand is needed because the opinion concerns "the treatment of confidential information" (Newtrend USA Co. v. United States, CIT # 22-00347).
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.
While counsel for the petitioner, GEO Specialty Chemicals, consented to the motion, the plaintiffs, led by Newtrend, opposed the voluntary remand motion, believing that the requested scope of remand is "too limited."
In Royal Brush, the Federal Circuit said there is no "legitimate government interest" in denying access to business confidential information when any such concerns on the "necessity of secrecy can be alleviated by issuing a protective order" (see 2307270038). The U.S. said in Newtrend's case -- which concerns the EAPA case on glycine from China -- that a remand is warranted given the "substantial and legitimate concern to reconsider its position" raised by Royal Brush.
CBP "now acknowledges potential concerns with how it treated confidential information during the underlying review, and how that may have limited plaintiffs in responding to GEO's transshipment allegations," the brief said. The U.S. said it intends to install a protective order should a remand be granted.