CIT Tosses Nebraska Man's 2nd Suit on Customs Broker Exam Results
The Court of International Trade dismissed Byungmin Chae's second lawsuit challenging his results of the April 2018 customs broker license exam, finding that the suit is precluded by the Nebraska resident's first case challenging the test.
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.
After failing the 2018 exam, Chae contested various questions on the exam, first appealing to CBP, then to CIT, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court, which declined a hearing (see 2310300023). He ultimately wound up one question correctly answered shy of a passing grade.
Undeterred, Chae returned to the trade court, arguing that he should receive credit for question 27 on the exam (see 2409030022). He argued that his suit is materially different from his previous foray at CIT, saying he's challenging the question on a different basis than he did previously. In his second go-round, Chae highlighted what he called an ambiguity in CBP's regulation undergirding question 27.
Judge Timothy Reif rejected this argument, holding that Chae failed to offer any new facts that arose after his first case and merely offered supplementary arguments. The test taker offers only "an additional reason that he should have been awarded credit for the same question," the judge said. Reif added that Chae had a chance to address his "purported confusion" on the regulation in the first case.
"Plaintiff is not entitled to an ongoing forum after a final judgment has been made in this Court," the decision said.
(Byungmin Chae v. U.S., Slip Op. 24-126, CIT # 24-00086, dated 11/13/24; Judge: Timothy Reif; Attorneys: Byungmin Chae, pro se; Marcella Powell for defendant U.S. government)