Importer Corrects 2 Lines in CAFC Brief in Customs Suit on Medical Foods Per US Request
Importer Nutricia North America filed an amended opening brief in a customs case at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on its substances used to "treat life-treatening diseases in young children," after government attorneys asked for the revisions. The brief was amended in two spots (Nutricia North America v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 24-1436).
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.
The original brief discussed the Court of International Trade's reliance on the phrase "other than nutritional preparations for intravenous administration" in Chapter 30 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule. Nutricia originally said this phrase was added due to the Australian government's "desire to ensure that nutritional intravenous preparations were included in Chapter 30 even if not used to treat or prevent a disease."
The revised brief said that the "reason for this addition was the desire to ensure that nutritional intravenous preparations were included in Chapter 30," stripping the line's mention of the Australian government.
The first brief also included a footnote discussing the trade court's ruling in the case. The original footnote said that, while the CIT didn't determine the meaning of "therapeutic" for subheading 9817.00.96, it said that the "'undisputed facts provide some support' for Nutricia's argument that medical foods are not 'therapeutic' within the meaning of Note 4(b)."
The revised brief's footnote just said that the "CIT did not determine the meaning of 'therapeutic' for purposes of subheading 9817.00.96."
The Court of International Trade in December said that the goods should be classified as food and not as pharmaceutical products, imposing a 6.4% duty on the goods under HTS heading 2106 (see 2312050028). Nutricia appealed, arguing that its products should be classified as "medicaments" or items "for the use or benefit" of handicapped people under heading 3004 (see 2405010058).