On June 16, 2009, the Court of International Trade ruled in Gilda Industries, Inc. vs. U.S., that the authority for the collection of the 100% beef hormone duties imposed on certain products from the European Union expired on July 29, 2007, when the domestic beef industry failed to timely file a request with the government to continue the duties.
In Value Vinyls, Inc. v. U.S., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the decision by the Court of International Trade that certain plastic-coated material, whose textile component is made entirely of man-made fibers, should be classified under subheading 3921.90.11 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule with a duty rate of 4.2 percent.
The Court of International Trade has ordered the retroactive refund of 100% duties paid by Gilda Industries, Inc. on imports of toasted bread from Spain, as the authority for the collection of these duties lapsed on July 29, 2007.
The following Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) and Court of International Trade (CIT) cases on antidumping and countervailing duty issues were dated or decided in the first half of June, 2009.
In Heartland By-Products, Inc., v. U.S., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the Court of International Trade, ruling that the CIT erred by not allowing retroactive classification treatment at the higher Tariff Rate Quota (TRQ) rate on imports of sugar syrup from Canada in accordance with an earlier decision by the CAFC (Heartland II CAFC 00-1287-1289).
U.S. Customs and Border Protection has issued a notice announcing that it has denied a petition submitted under 19 USC 1516 on behalf of a domestic interested party (Corning) requesting reclassification under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of glass preforms for optical fibers (optical glass preforms). CBP is also announcing the receipt of the petitioner's desire to contest this decision in court.
In Honda of America Mfg., Inc., v. U.S., the Court of International Trade ruled that certain oil bolts containing cross-sectional holes specially designed to permit the unimpeded flow of brake or transmission fluids are classified under HTS 7318.15.80 (as other screws and bolts) at a rate of duty of 8.5 percent ad valorem and not as a part or accessory of motor vehicle under 8708 or 8714.
The following Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) and Court of International Trade (CIT) cases on antidumping and countervailing duty issues were dated or decided in May 2009.
In Aectra Refining and Marketing, Inc. v. U.S., the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the ruling issued by the Court of International Trade that Aectra was not entitled to drawback for Merchandise Processing Fees (MPF) and Harbor Maintenance Taxes (HMT) paid on certain imports.
The following cases involving antidumping or countervailing duty (AD/CVD) issues were decided at the Court of International Trade (CIT) and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) in April 2009.