CIT Rules No Relief for a Broker's License Revoked for Failure to File Triennial Report Due to Illness
In Arthur C. Schick, III and Schick International Forwarding, Inc., v. U.S., the Court of International Trade ruled it had no authority to grant relief to Arthur Schick under 19 USC 1641(g) (Triennial reports by customs brokers) on the claim that his Customs broker's license was revoked without the observance of the proper procedures. On the remaining claims filed on behalf of the Plaintiff, the CIT cited the court's lack of jurisdiction on the subject matter.
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 2006, Schick, as a result of illness, failed to file a timely triennial report with Customs. By letter, Customs notified Schick that its customs broker's license had been suspended for failure to timely file the triennial report. The letter further stated that if the triennial report along with a $100 penalty fee was not submitted within sixty days, Schick's broker's license would be revoked under 19 USC 1641(g). Again by reason of illness, Schick failed to submit the required report. In letters dated June 22 and 26, 2006, Customs advised both Schick and Schick International that Schick's customs license had been revoked.
Plaintiff then filed suit on August 18, 2006, asserting that (1) the revocation of Schick's license required Customs to follow certain procedures, including a hearing, as required in 19 USC 1641(d)(2)(B); (2) that Customs was required by the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution to afford due process of law, and based on the Administrative Procedure Act, a hearing; and (3) that the revocation of Schick's license was an excessive fine or sanction prohibited by the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution.
The court found that while the CIT had jurisdiction to hear a claim with respect to revocation of a customs broker's license under 19 USC 1641(d)(2)(B), no such authority existed regarding revocation under 19 USC 1641(g).
The court noted that none of the provisions of 1641(d) (Disciplinary proceedings) contained any reference to subsection 1641(g). Thus, the plain language in the statute could not reasonably be construed to require adherence to the procedures of 1641(d) (2) (B), when a license was revoked under 1641(g). Further, the court stated that like the statute, the Customs regulations did not require adherence to procedures in 1641(d) (2) (B), prior to suspensions and revocations under 1641(g).
Thus, the CIT ruled that no relief could be granted on Schick's first claim. On Schick's second claim regarding the Fifth Amendment and the APA-required hearing prior to revocation, the CIT ruled that this was not within the Court's subject matter jurisdiction. On Schick's final claim that the revocation of his license was an excessive fine or sanction based on the Eight Amendment, the CIT also ruled that this was not within the Court's subject matter jurisdiction.
CIT Slip Op. 07-182 (dated 12/18/07) available at: http://www.cit.uscourts.gov/slip_op/Slip_op07/07-182.pdf