Dallas-based importer ADCO Industries, also known as Dallco Marketing, settled charges that it violated the False Claims Act by avoiding customs duties on Chinese industrial product imports, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Texas announced. The company agreed to pay $2.5 million to settle the whistleblower action, with $500,000 going to whistleblowers Donald Reznicek and Collen McFarland.
The Commerce Department asked the Court of International Trade for a voluntary remand on Dec. 11 in a countervailing duty case so it can reconsider or further explain its calculations for the ocean freight benchmark in light of a recent CIT ruling questioning the use of Descartes data. The present suit concerns the 2021 administrative review of the CVD order on solar products from China in which Commerce only used Descartes data to set the benchmark, prompting the case from solar cell exporters, led by Trina Solar (Changzhou) Science & Technology Co. (Trina Solar (Changzhou) Science & Technology Co. v. United States, CIT # 23-00219).
The Court of International Trade sent back the Commerce Department's decision to disregard Indonesian crude palm oil prices when it calculated antidumping duty respondent Wilmar's normal value, which was based off an export levy set by the Indonesian government. In a Nov. 21 opinion made public Dec. 12, Judge Richard Eaton said if the agency sticks with the particular market situation adjustment in the AD investigation on Indonesian biodiesel, it must explain why doing so doesn't lead to a double remedy, since Commerce countervailed the export levy in the related countervailing duty investigation.
Ghacham Inc., a Paramount, California-based wholesale clothing company operating under the Platini brand, was ordered to pay a $4 million fine and nearly $6.4 million in restitution for undervaluing its garment imports to avoid paying millions of dollars in customs duties, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Central District of California announced Dec. 8. The penalty, which also includes a five-year probationary period, was also levied for Ghacham's work with a woman tied to Mexico's Sinaloa drug cartel.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Dec. 8 lifted a stay in an Enforce and Protect Act case following its decision in the key Royal Brush Manufacturing v. U.S. case. In that decision, the appellate court said CBP violated an EAPA respondent's due process rights by not giving it access to the confidential information in the proceeding (see 2307270038). The present case concerns an EAPA investigation on the alleged transshipment of Chinese xanthan gum via India and was stayed pending the resolution of Royal Brush, given the overlap in the due process claims (see 2310170034). The U.S. is now attempting to distinguish its present situation from Royal Brush, arguing that the Federal Circuit's recent decision is irrelevant since "the facts here are materially different" seeing as liquidation became final in the present spat given that the importer didn't appeal its denied protest at CBP (All One God Faith v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1078).
The Court of International Trade extended the mediation period for a case brought by Evraz challenging the Commerce Department's denial of the importer's Section 232 steel and aluminum tariff exclusion requests. In the Dec. 11 text-only order, the trade court gave the parties until June 30, 2024, to resolve litigation led by Judge Leo Gordon. Evraz called for mediation, along with other litigants, to discuss the availability of a remedy for already liquidated entries (Evraz Inc. v. United States, CIT # 20-03869).
The Court of International Trade must dismiss a customs suit from importer Sucden Americas Corp. related to its sugar imports because the company didn't protest the liquidation of its entries or the denials of its post-importation preference claims, the U.S. said Dec. 11. Because of the failure to protest, the government said, the court doesn't have subject matter jurisdiction over the suit under Section 1581(a) (Sucden Americas Corp. v. United States, CIT # 22-00228).
The Commerce Department illegally used just one respondent in the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on stainless steel flanges from India covering entries in 2018-19, the Court of International Trade ruled Dec. 8. Judge Timothy Stanceu said that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's decision in YC Rubber Co. v. U.S. "is directly on point" in this case, because Commerce only reviewed exporter Chandan Steel Limited in a situation where multiple other companies exported the subject merchandise.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Judge Pauline Newman argued against her colleagues' argument that Newman's case against their investigation into her fitness to continue serving on the bench was mooted. Filing a sur-reply at the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the 96-year-old Newman said that her colleagues' voluntary cessation of an order indefinitely suspending the judge from hearing cases is "insufficient to moot the challenge," adding that the "complained-of conduct fits into the 'capable of repetition, yet evading review' exception to mootness" (The Hon. Pauline Newman v. The Hon. Kimberly Moore, D.D.C. # 23-01334).
Importer R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. voluntarily dismissed its customs classification suit at the Court of International Trade Dec. 7. The company contested CBP's denial of its protest claiming its mixtures for use in personal electronic vaporizing devices of Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 3824.99.9280, dutiable at 5%, should be classified under subheading 8543.90.8850, free of duty. Counsel for R.J. Reynolds didn't respond to our request for comment (R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. U.S., CIT # 21-00621).