Correction: In a Feb. 18 scope ruling, Commerce ruled that the frame of Harp Shoppe’s trolley is too far off 90 degrees to be considered vertical (as required to be covered by the antidumping duty order on hand trucks from China), so it is not subject to AD duties (see 14022134).
On Feb. 24 the Food and Drug Administration posted new and revised versions of the following Import Alerts on the detention without physical examination of:
During the week of Feb. 17-23, the Food and Drug Administration modified the following existing Import Alerts (not otherwise listed on the FDA's new and revised import alerts page) on the detention without physical examination and/or surveillance of:
On Feb. 24 the Foreign Agricultural Service posted the following GAIN reports:
The government on Feb. 24 filed suit against four importers of children’s products, alleging numerous violations of product safety standards. The Justice Department is seeking an order from the Central California U.S. District Court that prohibits the companies from importing any more violative product into the United States. According to the complaint, sampling by the Consumer Product Safety Commission has turned up violations of federal safety standards for lead, phthalates, and small parts in toys, as well as other CPSC product safety requirements.
A listing of recent antidumping and countervailing duty messages from the Commerce Department posted to CBP's website Feb. 24, along with the case number(s) and CBP message number, is provided below. The messages are available by searching for the listed CBP message number at addcvd.cbp.gov. (CBP occasionally adds backdated messages without otherwise indicating which message was added. ITT will include a message date in parentheses in such cases.)
The Court of International Trade on Feb. 25 again denied Best Key’s challenge to a CBP ruling revocation on its metallized yarn. Although it had dismissed the case in December, CIT reversed course on whether it could hear Best Key’s challenge. Contrary to its earlier decision, it found Best Key did not have to be a direct importer to file suit against the ruling revocation. This time, CIT heard Best Key's arguments related to CBP misconduct and the interpretation of tariff headings on metallized yarn. But the court was not convinced by Best Key’s evidence of misconduct, and found no clear error in CBP’s revocation of the rulings.
The International Trade Commission published notices in the Feb. 24 Federal Register on the following AD/CV injury, Section 337 patent, and other trade proceedings (any notices that warrant a more detailed summary will be in another ITT article):
Ivoclar Vivadent filed a complaint Feb. 19 with the International Trade Commission, alleging Dentsply is importing lithium silicate materials that infringe its patents in violation of Section 337 of the Tariff Act. The materials are used by dentists to make crowns, inlays, onlays, and bridges tailored to individual patients. Rather than go to a specialized laboratory, the material allows dentists to design and manufacture the dental restorations at their own offices. Ivoclar claims Dentsply recently began importing infringing lithium silicate dental products under the trade name Celtra Duo. The infringed patent allows Ivoclar to make dental products that achieve high strength, esthetics, and ease of use, all while allowing for machine tools to shape the dental restoration without undue wear of the tools. Ivoclar is seeking limited exclusion orders and cease and desist orders against importation and sale of the allegedly infringing products.
The Commerce Department published notices in the Feb. 24 Federal Register on the following AD/CV duty proceedings (any notices that announce changes to AD/CV duty rates, scope, affected firms, or effective dates will be detailed in another ITT article):