A ban on imports of some Mexican seafood will remain in effect, after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Nov. 28 denied a motion to stay the lower court ruling that set the ban. The Court of International Trade in July granted the preliminary injunction (see 1807260039), which bans importation of fish and fish products from Mexican commercial fisheries that use gillnets within the range of the endangered vaquita, amid concerns the fishing practice is driving the porpoise species to extinction. CBP subsequently set certification requirements for Mexican seafood in response to the court order (see 1808290047). Now on appeal, the Federal Circuit said in a one-page, non-precedential decision that the government “has not established that a stay of the order pending appeal is warranted here.” It did, however, leave the door open to a quick resolution of the case. “Given the urgency expressed in the government’s motion and the fact that the government self-expedited the filing of its opening brief, the court notes that it will consider a motion by the government to expedite oral argument in this appeal.”

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Nov. 19-25:

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

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Nov. 5-11:

The U.S. Virgin Islands government recently appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit a lower court decision finding that excise taxes it collects on goods imported from other parts of the U.S. are unconstitutional. The Sept. 28 decision in Virgin Islands federal district court found the U.S. territory’s collection of excise taxes on domestic imports violates the commerce clause of the Constitution. U.S.V.I. law provides for collection of excise tax on goods in the Caribbean island chain, but the territorial government never implemented regulations to implement the law and the territory’s customs and tax authorities only collect the excise tax on imports, foreign and domestic. Reefco filed the underlying complaint, seeking refunds on taxes it paid on boat parts. On appeal, the Virgin Islands government will raise the issue of whether the commerce clause extends to U.S. territories, it said in an Oct. 26 filing with the appeals court.

The Court of International Trade on Nov. 8 dismissed an auto parts importer’s request for protection from future bond requirements on its shipments, finding the concerns of U.S. Auto Parts were resolved earlier this year when CIT ordered CBP to stop mandating excessive bonds (see 1805290044). CBP has stopped requiring the bonds, and released “all backlogged containers,” so “U.S. Auto has received its requested relief,” CIT said. Despite the company’s concerns to the contrary, “because there is no reasonable expectation that the alleged violation will recur, and because the effects of the alleged violation no longer exist, Plaintiff’s case is moot,” the trade court said.

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Oct. 29 - Nov. 4:

A New York resident was sentenced to 30 months in prison over a scheme to import some $250 million in counterfeit footwear and apparel by way of importer identity theft, the Justice Department said in a press release. Su Ming Ling provided stolen identities to multiple customs brokers to bring in 200 shipping containers of counterfeit goods from China, DOJ said. Ling was charged last year (see 1709050044) and pleaded guilty in January. “With today’s sentence, Ling has been held responsible for illegally importing millions of dollars’ worth of knockoff goods that displace consumer demand for companies’ genuine products,” said Richard Donoghue, U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York.

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Oct. 22-28:

The trade group suing the Trump administration over Section 232 tariffs on steel has made another fundraising appeal to help pay its lawyers. The American Institute for International Steel also sent out a similar letter in July (see 1807200023). The case is scheduled for oral argument in the Court of International Trade on Dec. 19. "We are in need of $90-100,000 more in the next two weeks if we are going to maintain the stride and pace that has taken us to this important point," the trade group wrote. Members that have not contributed should "take a moment to calculate what the Section 232 tariffs are costing your business," AIIS Chairman John Foster said. "As an example, of the two port members we spoke with just last week, one is down 50 steel ships this year, while the other is off 30 year on year. These two ports by themselves support a large number of import steel and aluminum related-livelihoods."