The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reinstated a temporary restraining order blocking liquidation of entries of wind towers from China and Vietnam made during the “provisional measures” period between the preliminary determination and orders issued in the antidumping and countervailing duty investigations. The temporary restraining orders had been in place since March 4, pending the coalition’s challenge to the effective date of the AD/CV duty orders resulting from the investigations (see 13030820). Because of the injury vote in the investigations, the orders did not cover entries made between the preliminary determination and the AD/CV duty orders. The Court of International Trade denied the coalition’s motion for an injunction against liquidation, and dissolved the temporary restraining order (see 13040132), but the coalition appealed CIT’s ruling on April 3 (see 13040925). The appeals court is holding off on dissolution of the restraining order until it hears back from the government on the motion to stay.

A Colombian business owner convicted of attempting to defraud the Export-Import Bank of about $8 million -- through a scheme involving fake loan documents, deceiving wire transfers and forced defaults -- was ordered to pay more than $18 million and serve prison time, the Bank announced April 22. Juan Carlos Schwartzman, a Colombian citizen with permanent U.S. residency status, was sentenced in U.S. District Court on April 19 to 30 months in prison, plus 36 months of supervised release time and pay more than $18 million in restitution and forfeiture. He pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit mail fraud and wire fraud in July 2011. Schwartzman owned J.C. Schwartzman & Associates, a trade finance consulting firm in Miami and Barranquilla, Colombia. The firm assisted several Colombian buyers in obtaining lender financing guaranteed by Ex-Im, the Bank’s Office of Inspector General said in a release.

Ralph Lauren Corporation agreed to pay more than $1.5 million in penalties and disgorgement to the Justice Department and Securities and Exchange Commission on allegations the company bribed Argentinean government officials to obtain improper customs clearance of merchandise, the two federal agencies announced April 22.

Thai Plastic Bags Industries appealed the Court of International Trade’s Feb. 11 decision to sustain the final results of the 2008-09 administrative review of polyethylene retail carrier bags from Thailand (A-549-821). CIT had remanded in June 2012 on zeroing and a component of constructed value (see 12062548). TPBI’s AD rate rose to 21.29 percent (from 20.15 percent) as a result of the recalculation (see 13021206).

Guangdong Yihua Timber Industry, a respondent in the Commerce Department’s 2007 antidumping duty administrative review on wooden bedroom furniture from China (A-570-890), appealed the Court of International Trade’s Feb. 5 decision to affirm the final results of that review (see 13020615). The proceeding had been subject to three CIT remands on different issues, including input data for calculation of surrogate values and the adverse facts available rate assigned to Orient International (see 11021816, 12040508, and 12091002, respectively.

Link Snacks appealed the Court of International Trade’s March 20 ruling in favor of CBP’s classification of its beef jerky as cured, rather than dried, beef. Link Snacks had argued that beef jerky is defined by the drying process used in its manufacture, not the curing process. The court was sympathetic to Link Snacks’ argument, but in the end found that it could not go against the plain meaning of the terms in the HTS (see 13032103).

The Court of International Trade dismissed an action challenging the U.S. Customs Service’s HTS classification of certain models of Teva sports sandals as footwear with open toes or open heels, rather than as sports footwear. CIT found the 2008 decision of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a test case involving similar footwear to be controlling (see 08070735). The case had been filed by Deckers Corporation over a decade ago.

In its long-awaited ruling in Union Steel v. U.S., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed on April 16 the Court of International Trade’s approval of the practice of zeroing in antidumping administrative reviews, but not investigations.

The Court of International Trade sustained the Commerce Department’s decision to rescind an antidumping duty new shipper review of fresh garlic from China (A-570-831). Commerce had found that the sales being reviewed to establish Jinxiang Chengda’s AD rate were not commercially realistic, because of their high price, small quantity, and nearly simultaneous timing. The court agreed, noting that high prices could have distorted any AD rate that resulted from the new shipper review. The quantities and timing of the sale indicated that they were not indicative of future commercial behavior either, said the court.

A federal jury in Los Angeles awarded leather goods-maker Coach an $8 million judgment against a customs brokerage and its owner for violating trademark and customs laws. According to Coach, Celco Customs and its owner Shen Huei Feng “Celine” Wang acted as broker for importers that it knew were bringing in counterfeit handbags and wallets.