Customs failure to reliquidate entries does not constitute a 'mistake of fact.' In Fujitsu Compound Semiconductor, Inc. v. U.S., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) affirmed the Court of International Trade's (CIT's) earlier determination that Customs' failure to reliquidate certain entries of laser diode modules on its own initiative does not constitute a mistake of fact correctable under 19 USC 1520(c).
Court of International Trade
The United States Court of International Trade is a federal court which has national jurisdiction over civil actions regarding the customs and international trade laws of the United States. The Court was established under Article III of the Constitution by the Customs Courts Act of 1980. The Court consists of nine judges appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate and is located in New York City. The Court has jurisdiction throughout the United States and has exclusive jurisdictional authority to decide civil action pertaining to international trade against the United States or entities representing the United States.
Customs Not in Contempt for Revoking is Approval for the "Duty-free" Sale of Fuels.In Ammex, Inc. v. U.S., the Court of Appeal for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) affirmed the Court of International Trade's (CIT's) denial of Ammex's motion to hold Customs in contempt because it revoked approval of the sale of gasoline and diesel fuel on a duty- and tax-free basis at the Ambassador Bridge between Detroit, MI and Windsor, Canada.
On March 18, 2004, in DaimlerChrysler Corporation v. U.S., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) reversed the Court of International Trade's (CIT) denial of 9802.00.80 duty benefits for the top-coat painting of certain trucks assembled in Mexico.
Value allowance regarding warranty expenses, port repair expenses. In Saab Cars USA, Inc. v. U.S., the Court of International Trade (CIT) ruled that, with respect to imported automobiles, most of Saab's claims for an allowance in value for warranty expenses were not adequately supported. However, the CIT did conclude that Saab should be granted an allowance in value for its port repair expenses.
CIT rules in favor of Customs' liquidation of certain roller chain. In Peer Chain Co. v. U.S., the Court of International Trade (CIT) ruled that Customs correctly assessed $167,111 in antidumping (AD) duties and interest on Peer Chain, an importer of roller chain from Japan, despite the fact that the interest portion of the assessment was caused by the Commerce Department being five years late in notifying Customs (and providing public notice) that a court-ordered suspension of liquidation of the entries had been lifted.
CAFC reverses CIT & rules that certain hardwood flooring is plywood.In Boen Hardwood Flooring, Inc. v. U.S., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) ruled that certain hardwood flooring, which consists of laminated floor panels that are composed of three layers, is classifiable under HTS 4412.29 as other plywood.
CIT Rules in Favor of CBP's Classification of Frozen, Unbaked Danish. In Schulstad USA, Inc. v. U.S., the Court of International Trade (CIT) ruled in favor of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) finding that certain frozen, unbaked danish products were properly classified under HTS 1901.90.90 (6.4%) as other food preparations of flour, etc., not elsewhere specified or included.
The International Trade Administration (ITA) is amending its antidumping (AD) duty order, as well as its final and amended final affirmative AD duty determinations, on certain non-frozen apple juice concentrate from China as there is now a final and conclusive court decision affirming the ITA's remand determinations for this investigation.
In George E. Warren Corporation v. U.S., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) upheld an earlier Court of International Trade (CIT) ruling that denied the plaintiff's claim for drawback on Harbor Maintenance Taxes (HMTs) and Environmental Taxes (ETs).
In U.S. v. Inn Foods, Inc., the Court of International Trade (CIT) ruled that litigation filed by the U.S. on December 14, 2001 to collect Customs duties and fees from Inn Foods for violations of 19 USC 1592 regarding produce imported from Mexico was untimely by one day.