CBP wasn't required to make a scope referral to the Commerce Department in its antidumping duty evasion case against importer Vanguard Trading Co., since CBP properly exercised its authority in determining that Vanguard's products were under the scope of the relevant AD order, the Court of International Trade held in a decision made public May 27.

The Court of International Trade on May 27 entered default judgment against importer Rayson Global and its owner Doris Cheng in a customs penalty case after previously denying the government's bid for default judgment. In its second attempt to secure default judgment, the U.S. further defended its claim that the merchandise at issue is valued at nearly $3.4 million (United States v. Rayson Global, CIT # 23-00201).

One of the lawyers representing five importers suing President Donald Trump over his emergency tariffs said that the president's approach to tariffs, constantly threatening various new rates, sometimes backing off, and sometimes not, isn't just a "menace to the economy," it also "is totally at odds with the rule of law."

The Court of International Trade on May 23 dismissed Wisconsin man Gary Barnes' case against the ability of the president to impose tariffs. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves held that Barnes didn't have standing because he failed to claim that any harm he would suffer by tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump is "particularized" or "actual or imminent."

The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York on May 16 issued a temporary restraining order against two logistics companies, barring them from using the U.S. Postal Service to ship packages with counterfeit postage.

Letex Apparels, a Hong Kong trading company, filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California alleging that CBP negligently seized or forfeited 26,016 of the company's imported garments valued at $460,743.36. The company argued that, in handling its merchandise, CBP failed to "exercise due care" in handling the goods and violated the company's Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable seizure, the Administrative Procedure Act and a federal rule of criminal procedure requiring the return of property held by the government that isn't needed for evidentiary purposes (Letex Apparels Co. v. United States, C.D. Cal. # 2:25-04462).

The Court of International Trade on May 21 held a second hearing in as many weeks on the legality of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The same three judges, Jane Restani, Gary Katzmann and Timothy Reif, pressed both the government and counsel for 12 U.S. states challenging all IEEPA tariff actions on whether the statute allows for tariff action, as well as whether the courts can review if the declared emergencies are "unusual and extraordinary" and the extent to which the case is guided by Yoshida International v. U.S. (The State of Oregon v. Donald J. Trump, CIT # 25-00077).

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of May 12-18:

Former airline executive Skye Xu was sentenced to two years in prison for his role in a scheme to defraud Polar Air Cargo Worldwide of more than $32 million, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York announced on May 15. Xu pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit wire fraud and honest services wire fraud, wire fraud and conspiracy to commit money laundering.

The U.S. opened a civil suit against importers Aspects Furniture Manufacturing and Aspects Furniture International seeking nearly $7.7 million in unpaid antidumping duties on 99 entries of wooden bedroom furniture from China. The complaint also named Hospitality Engineering Services and the chief executive of all three companies, Amy Sivixay, as defendants, claiming that Hospitality and Sivixay are liable for the unpaid duties, since they controlled the actions of the two importers (United States v. Aspects Furniture Manufacturing, CIT # 25-00089).