Eteros to Add More Employees to Suit on Alleged CBP Retaliation for Win at CIT
Importer Eteros Technologies and its CEO, Aaron McKellar, said the company will add more of its employees to its case against CBP for allegedly retaliating against the company and McKellar for winning a customs case at the Court of International Trade. The motion for an extension of time to file an amended complaint in the suit came after the federal district court in Washington state largely kept the company's case alive (see 2508080055) (Eteros Technologies USA v. United States, W.D. Wash. # 2:25-00181).
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.
Eteros is scheduled to file its amended complaint on Aug. 29.
Earlier this month, the court said it had jurisdiction to review the revocation of McKellar's Nexus membership, which lets pre-screened travelers accelerate their entrance into the U.S., and the case isn't mooted by CBP's vacatur of an order banning McKellar from entering the U.S. for five years. The court also denied the government's bid to toss two of the plaintiffs' claims regarding CBP's alleged Administrative Procedure Act violations, since the U.S. failed to address these claims.
However, the court said claims directly related to the vacated removal order are mooted, and the company's due process claim was insufficiently pleaded.
In a stipulated motion for an extension of time to file an amended complaint, counsel for Eteros and McKellar said they have been "working diligently to finalize the amended complaint in this complex action," though more time is needed to "conduct and complete our internal review and counsel additional parties." Counsel for the parties said the extension is necessary to advise additional Eteros employees who "will be added as plaintiffs in the amended complaint."