The Court of International Trade rejected an importer's bid for reconsideration of its challenge of the countervailing duty rate assessed on its tire imports. The court found for the second time that the importer lacked proper jurisdiction due to an untimely filed protest of a liquidation decision. “The lesson is both clear and stark: Don’t sit on your rights,” Judge Stephen Alexander Vaden said.

The U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico ordered Puerto Rican companies Pharmacare and China District PR and their owner, Juan Reynoso, to stop importing dangerous children's toys, the Department of Justice said. The toys, along with other consumer products, violated the Consumer Product Safety Act and the Federal Hazardous Substances Act, among other laws, warranting an order from the court permanently enjoining the products' entry, DOJ said. The products allegedly had dangerous levels of lead and phthalates, according to the U.S.'s complaint against Reynoso and his companies. The Consumer Product Safety Commission has collected a total of 116 samples of these products since 2017, with 32 coming from Pharmacare and 84 from China District. These goods also included bicycle helmets, rattles and pacifiers that did not meet safety or labeling requirements, the DOJ complaint said.

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Sept. 6-12:

Sept. 10 is the one-year anniversary of the first-filed Section 301 complaint alleging the lists 3 and 4A tariffs on Chinese goods are unlawful under the 1974 Trade Act and violate the 1946 Administrative Procedure Act. Virtually all the roughly 3,800 cases from 6,500 or more importers that have since inundated the Court of International Trade seek to vacate the lists 3 and 4A tariff rulemakings and get the duties refunded with interest. A court order Sept. 8 vacated components of its July 6 preliminary injunction order instructed the government to liquidate customs entries from China with lists 3 and 4A tariff exposure “in the ordinary course” and refund the money with interest if the tariffs are declared unlawful, once the litigation becomes “final and conclusive” (see 2107060077). The order also frees the litigation to return to arguments on the merits after a prolonged battle over many months over refund relief. Oct. 1 is the deadline for Department of Justice to file papers supporting its June 1 dispositive motion and response to the plaintiffs’ Aug. 2 cross-motion. Nov. 15, the last date listed on the court’s April 13 briefing schedule, is when the plaintiffs file their reply.

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Aug. 30 - Sept. 5:

Global Plywood and Lumber Trading LLC was sentenced to pay $200,000 in restitution to Peru's Ministry of Environment after pleading guilty in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the Department of Justice said. The company admitted to importing illegally sourced timber from the Peruvian Amazon, in violation of the Lacey Act. The court also ordered the company to pay a $5,000 fine. In 2015, Global Plywood bought around 1,135 cubic meters of hardwood blanks from three suppliers in Peru, which then arrived at the Port of Houston, where it was seized by CBP (see 1606090042). In its guilty plea, Global Plywood admitted not obtaining or reviewing relevant harvest permits or Forest Travel Guides from SIGO, an open-source website run by the Peruvian government; failing to check SIGO for irregularities connected with its purchased timber; and relying on suppliers' statements without conducting due diligence, DOJ said. Global Plywood dissolved in 2017, forfeiting the illegal timber after civil action commenced.

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Aug. 23-29:

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Aug. 16-22:

A federal jury found six companies guilty of a conspiracy to defraud the U.S. through a “wire-and-customs” fraud scheme in which $1.8 billion in antidumping and countervailing duties were avoided on aluminum extrusions imported to the U.S. from China, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Central District 0f California said Aug. 23. Disguising the extrusions as “pallets,” the goods were shipped to the U.S. and sold to fraudulently inflate a Chinese company's revenues, the Department of Justice said. Litigation over the aluminum pallets has been going on in multiple venues (see 2011090041).

CBP cannot limit the amount of drawback that can be claimed on excise taxes, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said in an Aug. 23 opinion upholding the Court of International Trade's ruling. Holding that the CBP regulation defied the "clear intent of Congress," the appellate court ruled against the government appeal of CIT's decision, providing a win for the plaintiffs, the National Association of Manufacturers and The Beer Institute.