Acting Associate Attorney General Jesse Panuccio pointed to the whistleblower provisions in the False Claims Act as an important method for enforcing customs laws. The Justice Department is using the FCA "to prevent companies from flouting our customs laws," he said in a June 14 speech at an American Bar Association event on qui tam enforcement. "Over the last five years, the Department has recovered more than $100 million in settlements involving the evasion or underpayment of import duties for a wide variety of merchandise." Panuccio said DOJ will also use the FCA "against any entities involved in the opioid distribution chain who engage in the abuse and illegal diversion of opioids -- from pharmaceutical manufacturers and distributors, to pharmacies, to pain management clinics and physicians."

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of June 4-10:

A New York customs broker filed a guilty plea in connection with "a scheme to evade federal excise tax on imported cigars," the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida said in a news release. Alberto Rodriguez, of Briarwood, New York, allegedly used false entry summaries to misrepresent "among other things, the quantities of large cigars imported into the United States and the Federal tobacco excise tax due for those importations," the Department of Justice said. "In addition to consistently underreporting and evading the Federal tobacco excise tax, Rodriguez transmitted false and fraudulent documents to CBP using the United States Postal Service mail," DOJ said.

It's not clear that the president's authorities under Section 232 allow for the elimination of drawback, law firm Neville Peterson said in a blog post. President Donald Trump said in April that drawback would not be allowed for entries subject to the Section 232 tariffs (see 1804300064). "While this is a close question, the President’s power under Section 232 is limited to 'adjust[ing] imports,'” the law firm said. "It seems unlikely that the President can take action respecting exports, the activity which generally triggers claims for duty drawback."

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of May 28 - June 3:

An importer will drop its court challenge of an Emergency Action Notification blocking its shipment of corn at the Port of San Francisco, after reaching an agreement with the government to settle the case. In return for voluntarily dismissing its lawsuit, Sunrise will get an in-person meeting with representatives of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service in Washington, according to the settlement agreement. The shipment of corn, initially released based on an entry documentation that said it was organic and from Turkey but later found to be of Russian, Moldovan and Kazakhstani origin, never left its ship, and departed the Port of San Francisco the day after Sunrise’s initial bid for a court order failed in April (see 1804240065). Sunrise maintains that the shipment complied with all APHIS requirements. Sunrise agreed to dismissal with prejudice, which means it can’t bring the same legal claim again.

An importer will pay more than $80,000 in penalties for misdeclaring the country of origin on its entries of apparel products, the Court of International Trade said in a May 24 decision. The court ordered Active Frontier International to pay the maximum penalty for negligent customs violations under 19 USC 1592, partly because the importer did not exercise a minimum of reasonable care.

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of May 21-27:

The Court of International trade on May 25 issued an injunction barring CBP from imposing harsh bonding requirements on an importer accused of trademark infringement, finding CBP Norfolk far exceeded the agency’s own guidelines for bond amounts. The single transaction bond required by CBP Norfolk on U.S. Auto Parts would have put the company out of business, and indiscriminately applied to merchandise that was not alleged to be counterfeit while ignoring guidance in CBP’s bond directive, the court said.

After years of litigation, a "clarification" to the scope of antidumping duties on petroleum wax candles from China once deemed "overbroad" by the Court of International Trade will apparently stand. A candle importer, Trade Associates Group, agreed to dismiss its lawsuit with prejudice, meaning it can't bring the same challenge again. The National Candle Association, which represents U.S. candle manufacturers, claimed victory in a news release.