Importer Fine Emeralds will get refunds for duties paid on its rough, unworked emerald stones, the company announced in a stipulated judgment filed on Dec. 9 at the Court of International Trade. While the emeralds were assessed 10.5% duties under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 7103.10.40, the government agreed to classify the products under subheading 7103.10.20, free of duty. Fine Emeralds' preferred subheading covers uncorked precious stones (Fine Emeralds v. U.S., CIT # 20-03928).
Court-ordered reliquidations aren't actions taken by CBP and can't be protested, the government said in oral arguments held Dec. 6 before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. As a result, the Federal Circuit doesn't have jurisdiction to hear Target's appeal of a liquidation ordered by CIT, the U.S. said (Target v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-2274).
Judges at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Dec. 4 questioned importer Nature's Touch Frozen Foods (West) and the government regarding the tariff classification of frozen fruit mixtures. Judge Todd Hughes led the bulk of the questioning, pushing Nature's Touch on how to classify the goods if the court finds that the mixtures aren't food preparations, as claimed by the company, and how they should be classified instead under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 0811, which covers certain frozen fruit (Nature's Touch Frozen Foods (West) v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-2093).
CBP has released its Dec. 4 Customs Bulletin (Vol. 58, No. 48), which contains no ruling actions but includes a notice of the revocation of U.S. Virgin Islands-based AmSpec as a customs-accredited laboratory and customs-approved gauger. It also includes three Court of International Trade slip opinions.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the weeks of Nov. 18-24 and Nov. 25 - Dec. 1:
Brandon Chen, who took the April 2022 customs broker license exam, appealed the final results of his exam to the Court of International Trade, contesting 11 questions that CBP denied him credit for. Filing a complaint at the trade court on Nov. 25, Chen noted that he is only two correct answers away from a passing score of 75% (Brandon Chen v. U.S., CIT # 24-00208).
CBP properly found that importer Skyview Cabinet USA evaded the antidumping and countervailing duties on wooden cabinets and vanities after correcting a due process violation in the evasion proceeding, the Court of International Trade held on Nov. 27. Judge Stephen Vaden said that the court already found the evasion finding sufficient and that Skyview didn't advance any new evidence or arguments after the due process-related remand.
CBP has released its Nov. 27 Customs Bulletin (Vol. 58, No. 47), which includes the following ruling actions:
The Court of International Trade ruled Nov. 26 that it has jurisdiction over all denied protests of CBP detention decisions -- even if the government claimed that the Drug Enforcement Administration, not CBP, chose to make the seizure. CBP has the final authority over all detentions, making all detentions protestable under U.S. law, CIT Judge Timothy Reif held in his opinion.
A New York resident brought a complaint to the Court of International Trade Nov. 21 saying that several questions on CBP’s customs broker exam were unfairly ambiguous, conflicting or lacking essential information, resulting in his failure to pass it (Shuangyang Li v. U.S. Customs and Border Protection, CIT # 24-00205).