Recent Court Cases on International Trade for February 25 - March 3
The following Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and Court of International Trade cases on international trade issues were dated/decided during February 25 - March 3, 2008:
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.
CAFC Affirms Byrd Amendment Does Not Apply to Imports from Canada or Mexico
In this trade case concerning the interaction between the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, and the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act (CDSOA), often referred to as the "Byrd Amendment," the CAFC affirmed the decision by the CIT that the Byrd Amendment does not apply to antidumping and countervailing duties assessed on imports of goods from Canada or Mexico. (Canadian Lumber Trade Alliance et. al., vs. the U.S. et. al., 2006-1622,-1625,-1626,-1627,-1636,-1648, decided 02/25/08.) (See ITT's Online Archives or 03/06/08 news, 08030642, for previous BP summary.)
CIT Requires ITA to Provide More Value Information on Chinese Wooden Bedroom Furniture
Based on an initial remand by the CIT, the International Trade Administration provided information to support its determination of sales at less than fair value of wooden bedroom furniture from China. In the current case, the CIT reviewed the factors used by the ITA in approximating the normal value of this merchandise, and affirmed some of their determinations. However, on some items the CIT requested that the ITA provide additional value information. (Dorbest Ltd., et. al. v. U.S. et. al., Slip Op. 08-24, dated 02/27/08)
CIT Requires Further Information to Determine Classification of Certs Cool Mint Drops
Warner-Lambert Company challenged the classification by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) of their Certs Cool Mint Drops as sugar confectionery under Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) Heading 1704. Warner-Lambert claimed their mint drops were properly classified as a preparation for oral or dental hygiene under HTS Heading 3306. The CIT denied the motions for summary judgment by both parties, citing the need for further information. (Warner-Lambert Company v. U.S., Slip Op. 08-25, dated 03/03/08)
CAFC Byrd Amendment decision (Canadian Lumber Trade Alliance et. al., vs. the U.S. et. al., 2006-1622,-1625,-1626,-1627,-1636,-1648, decided 02/25/08) available at http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions/06-1622%20-1625%20-1626.pdf
CIT wooden bedroom furniture AD decision (Dorbest Ltd., et. al. v. U.S. et. al., Slip Op. 08-24, dated 02/27/08) available at http://www.cit.uscourts.gov/slip_op/Slip_op08/08-24.pdf
CIT Certs Cool Mint Drops decision (Warner-Lambert Company v. U.S., Slip Op. 08-25, dated 03/03/08) available at http://www.cit.uscourts.gov/slip_op/Slip_op08/08-25.pdf