The Court of International Trade dismissed on Sept. 16 part of a Chinese company’s challenge of its high $4.71/kg antidumping duty rate assigned to it after the Commerce Department ended a new shipper review for the company. Qingdao Maycarrier Import & Export had requested both a new shipper review and an administrative review on fresh garlic from China (A-570-831) in the hopes of obtaining a lower AD rate. But Commerce ended the new shipper review because the company purportedly wasn’t a new shipper. And it refused a normal administrative review for the company. Part of Maycarrier’s court complaint directly addressed the refusal of administrative review. CIT dismissed the part of the complaint related to the refusal of administrative review, because it was filed before that review was finalized, and not within 60 days of the final results as required by law. The parts of the complaint directly challenging the new shipper review survive.

A Florida man was sentenced Sept. 12 for operating an illicit, San Diego-based online pharmacy that sold over $7 million worth of “unapproved and misbranded oncology drugs at a substantial discount” to U.S. doctors, said Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Martin Bean of Boca Raton, Fla., pleaded guilty in February to conspiring to commit numerous federal offenses, including wire fraud, mail fraud, selling unapproved and misbranded drugs, and importing merchandise contrary to law.

The U. S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed on Sept. 16 a lower court decision that found Del Monte’s tuna product, packed in small amounts of oil, should nonetheless be classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule as having been packed “in oil.” The Court of International Trade had in October said the amount of oil was irrelevant for classification purposes, because neither the HTS nor prior court rulings set a minimum threshold for what it means to be packed “in oil” (see 12101601). CAFC agreed, finding it unnecessary to look beyond the terms of the tariff schedule. The Appeals Court also upheld CIT’s ruling on valuation “formulas.”

The ITC decided to review the final initial determination of an administrative law judge in the complaint filed by SI Group of Schenectady, N.Y., May 21, 2012, alleging violations of Section 337 of the Tariff Act in the import of certain rubber resins by reason of misappropriation of trade secrets. Respondents were Red Avenue Chemical of Rochester, N.Y.; Thomas R. Crumlish, Jr. of Rochester, N.Y.; Precision Measurement International of Westland, Mich.; Sino Legend (Zhangjiagang) Chemical Co. of Zhangjiagang City, China; Sino Legend Holding Group of Kowloon, Hong Kong; Ning Zhang of North Vancouver, Canada; Quanhai Yang of Beijing, China; and Shanghai Lunsai International Trading Company of Shanghai City, China.

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the original calculations by the Department of Commerce of the profit cap applicable under 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(2)(B)(iii) to merchandise sold by Italian exporter Atar S.r.l. ("Atar") in the ninth administrative review of an antidumping duty order directed to certain Italian pasta products, it said in a Sept. 11 decision. The Court of International Trade had rejected those calculations, causing Commerce to revise its determination, eventually including above--and below--cost sales made by profitable and unprofitable respondents in the prior administrative review to satisfy the trade court's remand orders. The CAFC concluded that Commerce's original profit cap calculation was reasonable.

A Chinese national and resident of Oakland, Calif., pleaded guilty Sept. 3 to conspiring to illegally export radiation-hardened computer memory circuits from the U.S. to China, according to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI). Philip He, an employee at Sierra Electronic Instruments, bought 312 radiation-hardened circuits, valued at almost $550,000, from a Colorado manufacturer. ICE said the circuits are categorized as defense articles within the International Trafficking in Arms Regulations, and the exporting of such articles requires licensing from the State Department’s Directorate of Defense Trade Controls. According to the indictment, He provided false certification to the Colorado manufacturer indicating the purchased circuits were for end-use in the U.S.

Barbara Williams, 55, attorney-in-charge of the International Trade Field Office in the Justice Department's Civil Division, died Sept. 6. Williams was a lawyer with the field office in New York since 1994 and was named the attorney-in-charge in 2004. Prior to joining the DOJ, she clerked with U.S. Court of International Trade Judge Richard Goldberg. Williams was also an active member of the Court of International Trade Bar Association, serving as chairwoman for Continuing Legal Education and Professional Responsibility. The DOJ did not comment. She's survived by her husband David and son Jackson. Donations can be made to the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center at 1275 York Avenue NY, NY (here).

Two brothers who both worked in law enforcement agencies were arrested Sept. 5 for allegedly conspiring to export high-powered weapons from the U.S. to the Philippines, said U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Rex Maralit, a New York City police officer, and Wilfredo Maralit, a CBP officer in Los Angeles, participated in a scheme to smuggle assault rifles, sniper rifles, pistols and firearm accessories to the Philippines for sale to overseas customers. ICE said a third brother residing in the Philippines, Ariel Maralit, was also involved and had “identified customers and sought the assistance of his brothers” to purchase and ship the weapons. The brothers responded to customer orders by locating weapons advertised on firearms-brokering websites and arranged to buy the guns through dealers in the U.S. They then “disassembled the weapons and smuggled them out of the United States in disguised shipments,” ICE said.

The Court of International Trade remanded for the third time the duty rate assigned to four companies in the 2008 antidumping duty administrative review on wooden bedroom furniture from China (A-570-890). The Commerce Department had based part of the rate on a small percentage of overall sales with high prices to punish the companies for their lack of cooperation. It set a 43.23% AD rate for Dongguan Sunrise Furniture Co., Ltd.; Taicang Sunrise Wood Industry Co., Ltd.; Taicang Fairmount Designs Furniture Co., Ltd.; and Meizhou Sunrise Furniture Co., Ltd. CIT remanded the rate in June 2012 (see 12060729) and again in April 2013 (see 13040903), because the rate was too high and didn’t reflect commercial reality. This time, Commerce set a threshold of 0.04% of total sales for a single sale to determine the entire rate for a given product. But CIT again found the agency’s reliance on a “minuscule” percentage of sales meant the rate wasn’t rooted in commercial reality, and remanded for Commerce recalculation.

The Eastern New York U.S. District Court dismissed on Aug. 30 an importers’ claim that Panalpina fraudulently induced it to enter into a contract for customs brokerage and freight forwarding services. Michael Kearnis, formerly president of Pinnacle Interior Elements, said Panalpina’s misclassification of Pinnacle’s wood flooring, and subsequent failure to fix the problem, amounted to going back on Panalpina’s promises of a seamless supply chain. Magistrate Judge Ramon Reyes ruled that Panalpina’s errors were at most a breach of contract, and did not amount to fraudulent inducement to sign the contract in the first place, because the broker and forwarder intended to fulfill the contract when it was signed.