The U.S. filed a motion for default judgment on Aug. 7 against importer E-Dong, U.S.A. in pursuit of $234,748.30 in lost revenue due to the importer's negligent failure to pay a federal excise tax on its "Korean distilled beverage soju." The government said E-Dong lied on customs forms by misclassifying the distilled liquor as rice wine, adding that these misstatements "constitute negligent violations for failure to exercise reasonable care and competence" (United States v. E-Dong, U.S.A., CIT # 24-00066).

CBP improperly classified importer Air Distribution USA's shisha molasses, also known as "hookah tobacco," as a type of "smoking tobacco" and erroneously subjected the shisha molasses to federal excise taxes on "pipe tobacco," Air Distribution argued in a complaint last month at the Court of International Trade (Air Distribution USA v. United States, CIT # 25-00063).

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of July 28 - Aug. 3.

The Court of International Trade on July 29 denied importers Johanna Foods' and Johanna Beverage Company's application for a temporary restraining order against President Donald Trump's threatened 50% tariff on Brazil. Judge Timothy Reif held that the importers failed to show "a likelihood that immediate and irreparable harm would occur before the threatened August 1, 2025 tariff" (Johanna Foods v. Executive Office of the President of the United States, CIT # 25-00155).

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the weeks of July 14-20 and 21-27:

An entry of gold jewelry from Oman qualifies for duty-free treatment under the U.S.-Oman Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, importer Empire Jewelry argued in a July 28 complaint to the Court of International Trade. The importer noted that CBP doesn't disagree as to the Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading that applies to the case, subheading 7113.19.5090, but rather whether the jewelry originates in Oman under the terms of the FTA (Empire Jewelry v. United States, CIT # 24-00127).

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on July 28 sustained the Commerce Department's non-market economy policy in antidumping duty proceedings despite the fact that the agency hadn't codified the policy in its regulations at the time the underlying review was challenged. Judges Todd Hughes, William Bryson and Leonard Stark said the Federal Circuit has a long line of cases upholding the policy and that, even if those cases didn't exist, Commerce didn't need to engage in notice-and-comment rulemaking to implement the policy.

The Court of International Trade on July 28 denied importer Detroit Axle's motion for a preliminary injunction against President Donald Trump's decision to end the de minimis threshold on goods from China, which was made under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Judges Gary Katzmann, Timothy Reif and Jane Restani said they already have granted all the relief the importer is seeking, though the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit stayed that relief.

Importers Global Plastics and Marco Polo International agreed to pay $6.8 million to settle claims that they violated the False Claims Act by knowingly failing to pay customs duties on plastic resin from China, DOJ announced. The U.S. said Global Plastics and Marco Polo, both subsidiaries of MGI International, received credit for "cooperating with the government."

Importer Grosfillex agreed to pay $4.9 million to settle claims that it violated the False Claims Act by evading antidumping and countervailing duties on items made with aluminum extrusions from China, DOJ announced. The FCA case was initially filed by Edward Wisner, a former employee of Grosfillex and whistleblower in the case, who will receive a $962,662.74 cut of the settlement.