CIT Denies U.S. Request to Dismiss USA-ITA's Case Against "Threat-Based" China Textile Safeguards, Etc
On March 18, 2005, the Court of International Trade (CIT), among other things, denied the U.S. government's request that it dismiss with respect to jurisdictional issues a complaint filed by the U.S. Association of Importers of Textiles and Apparel (USA-ITA) that seeks review of CITA's decision to consider "threat-based" China textile safeguard petitions. The CIT also deferred ruling on the U.S.' motion to dismiss the case because of substantive claims.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
(In December 2004, the CIT issued a preliminary injunction temporarily enjoining the Committee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements (CITA) from accepting, considering, or taking any further action on requests filed under CITA's textile safeguard procedures that are based on the threat of market disruption by textile or apparel products from China. See ITT's Online Archives or 01/04/05 news, 05010405, for BP summary of this temporary injunction and a list of pending threat-based China safeguard petitions affected by this action.)
CIT Finds that USA-ITA's Claims are Ripe for Review
The U.S. government argued that USA-ITA's claims would only become ripe for review if CITA decides to impose safeguard measures pursuant to threat-based requests, at which time a "final decision will issue that may be properly protested to the CIT."
The CIT rejected this argument and explained this matter is limited to a consideration of whether CITA exceeded its delegated authority or failed to conform to relevant procedural requirements by deciding to accept threat-based China safeguard petitions. Secondly, the CIT found that USA-ITA has suffered, and would continue to suffer, irreparable harm as a result of CITA's acceptance of threat-based requests absent a temporary injunction. In light of these findings, the CIT determined that USA-ITA's claims are ripe for judicial review.
CIT Finds that USA-ITA's Claims are Not Barred by "Exhaustion Doctrine"
The U.S. government also argued that USA-ITA has not yet exhausted its administrative remedies because it must first fully participate in the 30-day comment period for each threat-based China safeguard petition accepted by CITA before it can protest CITA's acceptance of these requests.
The CIT also rejected this argument, stating that the only available administrative "remedy" in this case is CITA's comment period, which provides only illusory relief. CIT explains that as USA-ITA is challenging the legitimacy of CITA's acceptance of "threat-based petitions, full participation in CITA's administrative proceeding cannot be expected.
CIT Ruling, which also contains information on the deferred U.S. motion to dismiss the case with respect to substantive claims (Slip Op. 05-35, dated 03/18/05) available at http://www.cit.uscourts.gov/slip_op/Slip_op05/05-35.pdf