A Pennsylvania man was charged with smuggling counterfeit Viagra and Cialis pills into the U.S. The case is being investigated by Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) with assistance from U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Postal Inspection Service. An HSI investigation revealed that Randy Hucks rented several mail boxes at a U.S. Postal Facility in Philadelphia on behalf of businesses that he allegedly owned under such names as Bargain Basket Inc., Fashionista Inc. and Fashionista Emporium Inc. As part of the alleged scheme, Hucks illegally imported 10,188 counterfeit Viagra pills and 3,040 counterfeit Cialis pills from factories in China. If convicted, Hucks faces up to 100 years in federal prison and a fine of $5 million.

A Miami businessman pleaded guilty in connection with the illegal receipt, purchase and sale of ozone-depleting refrigerant gas that had been smuggled into the U.S., following an investigation by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Criminal Investigation Division and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). The investigation revealed that Carlos Garcia, 53, of Mar-Cone Appliance Parts Co., would routinely seek out and arrange the purchase of black market hydrochlorofluorocarbon-22 (HCFC-22), which is a widely used refrigerant for residential heat pump and air-conditioning systems, from various importers who did not hold the required unexpended consumption allowances, totaling about 55,488 kilograms of restricted HCFC-22, with a fair market value of approximately $639,458. The refrigerant gas was distributed by Mar-cone throughout the United States.

The Court of International Trade denied the U.S. Government’s motion to amend an August 2011 judgment against defendants Great American Insurance Company of New York and Washington International Insurance Company. The government moved to amend the judgment, in which the CIT granted in part the government’s request to recover antidumping duties on bonds covering entries subject to the AD order on freshwater crawfish tail meat from China (A-570-848), in order to collect pre and post-judgment interest. CIT denied the government’s Rule 59(e) motion to amend the judgment because the Government’s request was to consider the issue for the first time, rather than reconsider the issue, which contravenes the purpose of a Rule 59(e) motion. The CIT did not consider the Government’s argument that it is entitled to prejudgment under 19 USC 580. (CIT Slip Op. 12-49, dated 04/11/12, Judge Goldberg)

The Court of International Trade remanded the results of the International Trade Administration’s initial remand of the 2005-06 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from India (A-533-820). CIT sustained the ITA’s remand redetermination of Indian intervenor-defendant Essar’s duty-drawback claim in response to domestic plaintiffs’ arguments, as well as its decision to use invoice date as the date of sale, rather than the date of the letter of credit, as it had in the original final results. However, CIT remanded the initial remand results (i) for application of the ITA’s new policy on adjusting cost of production in accordance with the adjustment to Essar’s export price resulting from its duty-drawback claim, and (ii) to allow for the correction of a ministerial error discovered by Essar and agreed to by the ITA. CIT says that the ITA has until May 25, 2012 to amend and correct the initial remand results. (Slip Op. 12-48, dated 04/11/12, Judge Aquilino)

More than $896,000 in proceeds from the distribution of counterfeit sports apparel as the result of an investigation into the sale of counterfeit goods on commercial websites were seized by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement-led National Intellectual Property Rights Coordination Center (IPR Center) and the Department of Justice. The investigation also resulted in the seizure of seven domain names engaged in the sale of counterfeit goods. The funds were seized from interbank accounts and three PayPal accounts.

The Court of International Trade announced that, effective May 1, 2012, it has approved certain increases in fees for services provided by the CIT. Specifically, CIT increased fees for, among other things, original admission of an attorney to practice (now $76), records retrieval (now $53), filing/indexing in cases where a case filing fee has not been paid (now $46), etc. CIT said the changes flow from an increase in the district court miscellaneous fee schedule promulgated under Title 28 U.S.C. § 1914.

The U.S. settled a civil lawsuit against Fleurchem, a chemical manufacturing company in Middletown, NY, for repeated violations of the Controlled Substances Act. The government's complaint alleged that Fleurchem manufactured chemicals that can be used to manufacture illegal drugs and repeatedly exported them to foreign countries without notifying the Drug Enforcement Agency, as required by the Controlled Substances Act. In the settlement agreement, Fleurchem admitted it exported the "List 1" chemicals without notifying the DEA on "dozens" of occasions between June 2008 and May 2011. Fleurchem also agreed to pay $420,000 in civil penalties, one of the largest penalties ever obtained by the U.S. for violations of the Controlled Substances Act by a chemical exporter. The company also agreed to implement enhanced compliance procedures, including the retention of a permanent compliance manager, and the creation of a permanent compliance committee. The agreement was approved April 6 by the White Plains federal court.

The Court of International Trade remanded the all-others rate from the final countervailing duty determination of aluminum extrusions from China (C-570-968) to the International Trade Administration for further consideration and explanation. Domestic plaintiffs challenged the ITA’s decision to entirely base the 374.15% all-others rate on the non-cooperative mandatory respondents’ adverse facts available (AFA) rate of the same amount, and omit voluntary respondents’ rates from the all-others calculation. According to plaintiffs, this decision was prohibited by the governing statute, based on an invalidly promulgated regulation, and unreasonable and not supported by substantial evidence. CIT disagreed with plaintiffs' first two arguments, but agreed that the ITA’s methodology was unreasonable and remanded.

The Court of International Trade found that the International Trade Administration failed to comply with the CIT’s instructions in the ITA’s remand redetermination of final results of the 2007 administrative review of wooden bedroom furniture from China (A-570-890). Specifically, the CIT found that the ITA did not reconsider or further explain the China-wide rate of 216.01% assigned to Orient International Holding Shanghai Foreign Trade Co., Ltd. or the ITA's choice of weight-based data to determine the surrogate value for wood inputs. The CIT has now remanded these issues for a second time.

The Court of International Trade remanded the final results of the antidumping duty new shipper review of fresh garlic from China (A-570-851) to the ITA for redetermination. Specifically, in response to arguments from Chinese plaintiff Qingdao Sea-line Trade Co., Ltd., which was assigned a rate of 155.33% in the review, CIT ordered the ITA to: (1) explain its decision to use a non-contemporaneous surrogate value in its calculations; (2) revisit its use of Tata Tea’s statements to calculate surrogate financial ratios, and if ITA continues to use Tata Tea, explain why it constitutes the best available information; and (3) evaluate plaintiff’s suggestion during the review to use financial statements from Garlico to calculate surrogate financial ratios. The ITA’s remand redetermination is due to CIT by July 23, 2012. (CIT Slip Op. 12-39, dated 03/21/12, Judge Eaton)