CBP ignored the metadata of certain photographs and videos in an evasion investigation in order to claim they were unreliable, a wooden cabinet importer argued July 8 at the Court of International Trade (Skyview Cabinet USA v. U.S., CIT # 22-00080).
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.
CBP has released its July 10 Customs Bulletin (Vol. 58, No. 27). It contains a final rule adopting amendments to CBP regulations related to the import of merchandise that violates or is suspected of violating copyright laws, including the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (see 2407010029). It also contains a notice of revocation of one ruling letter and a revocation of treatment relating to the tariff classification of an automotive clutch tube that will be effective for merchandise entered or withdrawn from warehouse or consumption on or after Aug. 9.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of July 1-7:
The Court of International Trade sustained CBP's finding that Dominican exporter Kingtom Aluminio didn't evade antidumping and countervailing duty orders on aluminum extrusions from China. In a June 13 decision made public July 8, Judge Richard Eaton said Kingtom responded to all U.S. requests for information during an Enforce and Protect Act investigation, precluding the use of adverse facts available. He also said the court can't ignore "the total lack of any record evidence of any imports by Kingtom into the Dominican Republic" of aluminum extrusions made in China.
International Trade Today is providing readers with the top stories from last week in case they were missed. All articles can be found by searching on the titles or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the weeks of June 10-16, 17-23 and 24-30:
The U.S. on July 1 urged the Court of International Trade to dismiss customs broker Seko Customs Brokerage's suit contesting CBP's suspension of the company from participation in the Entry Type 86 pilot and Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism program. The government said Seko's claims aren't ripe for judicial review, are moot and are premature (Seko Customs Brokerage v. U.S., CIT # 24-00097).
The U.S. Supreme Court on June 28 overturned a hallmark of administrative law that had stood for four decades: the principle, established in Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, of deferring to federal agencies' interpretation of ambiguous statutes.
The Drug Enforcement Administration told CBP that it believes importer UniChem's entry of "7-keto dehydroepiandrosterone is a Schedule III anabolic steroid and its importation violates DEA regulations." As a result, DEA requested that CBP seize the entry on DEA's behalf, the U.S. told the Court of International Trade in a June 25 status report (UniChem Enterprises v. U.S., CIT # 24-00033).
On July 1, the Commerce Department will begin reconducting the sunset reviews on stilbenic optical brightening agents (OBAs) from Taiwan and China, after the Court of International Trade on May 28 found that the regulatory provision upon which Commerce relied to revoke the antidumping duty orders on OBAs from the two countries (see 2212280023) violated the Tariff Act.