In Canex International Lumber Sales Ltd., v. U.S., the Court of International Trade ruled that cut lumber, with an angle cut on one end and a square cut on the other end was properly classified as sawn wood under Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) 4407.10.0015 free of duty, and not as roof trusses under 4418.90.4020 at 3.2% ad valorem, or as other articles of wood under 4421.90.9840 at 3.3% ad valorem.
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a finding by the Court of International Trade in favor of an International Trade Administration determination that mixed-wax candles imported by Target Corporation from China are “later-developed merchandise” that are legitimately included in the AD order on petroleum wax candles from China.
In Michael Simon Design, Inc., Tru 8 d/b/a Arriviste, Inc., and Target Stores (a division of Target Corporation), v. U.S., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Court of International Trade’s refusal to review a new Chapter 95 note added to the U.S. Harmonized Tariff Schedule by Presidential Proclamation.
On June 17, 2010, the Court of International Trade denied U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s request to reconsider1 its January 2010 remand decision, which ruled that broker penalties2 could not be imposed against UPS Customhouse Brokerage, Inc., as CBP had failed to prove at trial that it had considered all ten 19 CFR 111.1 factors when evaluating whether UPS had maintained responsible supervision and control.
On June 17, 2010, the Court of International Trade denied the request of U.S. Customs and Border Protection that it reconsider its remand decision denying the government's request for a rehearing to recover $75,000 in penalties imposed by CBP against UPS, for its alleged failure to exercise responsible supervision and control over its customs brokerage business.
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) vacated an International Trade Commission (ITC) decision that denied John Deere & Company an exclusion order against imports of European models of its harvesters, and ordered the agency to define what “all or substantially all” means in determining whether Deere’s U.S. sales are mainly of U.S. made products and thus qualify for an ITC exclusion order against unauthorized imports.
In a test case Honda Of America Mfg., Inc., v. U.S., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Court of International Trade’s judgment that certain oil bolts containing cross-sectional holes designed to permit brake or transmission fluids to flow through without leaking are properly classified under HTS 7318.15.80 (as other screws…), at 8.5 percent ad valorem duty rate and not as a part or accessory of motor vehicle under HTS 8708 or 8714.
The Court of International Trade and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decided the following antidumping and countervailing duty law determinations in the second half of May 2010.
Pursuant to the Offset Act1, also known as the Byrd Amendment, U.S. Customs and Border Protection has issued notice of its intent to distribute assessed antidumping or countervailing duties for fiscal year 2010.
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has invalidated the International Trade Administration’s use of labor rate data from high-income countries in valuing merchandise imported from less developed non-market economies (NMEs), overturning an ITA regulation that increased dumping rates.