The Court of International Trade on Feb. 2 dismissed a pair of customs cases for lack of prosecution, since the cases weren't removed from the customs case management calendar prior to the "expiration of the applicable period of time of removal" (Kehoe Component Sales v. United States, CIT # 22-00187) (Froggy's Fog v. United States, CIT # 23-00273).
The Court of International Trade on Feb. 3 entered default against importer Aspects Furniture International and its current CEO Dean Clark in a customs penalty suit originally brought against Aspects Furniture International, Aspects Furniture Manufacturing, Hospitality Engineering Services and an executive of all three companies, Amy Sivixay. Deputy clerk Geoffrey Goell entered the judgment for a cross-claim made by Sivixay, Aspects Furniture Manufacturing and Hospitality against Aspects Furniture International and Clark (United States v. Aspects Furniture Manufacturing, CIT # 25-00089).
The proper standard of review for the Forced Labor Enforcement Task Force's (FLETF's) listing and removal decisions regarding the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (UFLPA) Entity List is a "reasonable cause to believe that the statutory requirements of the UFLPA have been met," the U.S. argued. Filing a reply brief at the Court of International Trade, the government said exporter Camel Group is wrong to claim that the trade court should adopt a "preponderance of the evidence standard" in assessing FLETF's decision not to remove Camel Group from the UFLPA Entity List (Camel Group v. United States, CIT # 25-00022).
A dispute panel at the World Trade Organization found on Jan. 30 that the Inflation Reduction Act's electric vehicle tax credits violate various WTO commitments.
The following lawsuits were filed recently at the Court of International Trade:
Importer Amcor Flexibles Singen filed stipulated judgments in a pair of cases at the Court of International Trade regarding the classification of its flexible packaging material entries. According to the judgments, CBP agreed to classify the goods as "backed aluminum foil" under duty-free Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 7607.20.50 despite previously classifying them as "other" plastic foils of HTS subheading 3921.90.40, dutiable at 4.2% (Amcor Flexibles Singen v. United States, CIT #s 16-00031, 16-00199).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Feb. 2 affirmed the Court of International Trade's ruling that the International Trade Commission's policy of automatically redacting questionnaire responses violates the "common law right of access" to judicial proceedings. Judges Timothy Dyk, Richard Taranto and Raymond Chen held that the relevant statutes governing redactions of information before both CIT and the commission don't "abrogate" this common law right nor allow the ITC's practice.
The Court of International Trade should deny exporter Fontaine's motion requesting an order for CBP to issue "pre-liquidation refunds of cash deposits paid on subject entries" in a case on an expedited countervailing duty review given that the court recently rejected this same requested relief in a related case, the U.S. argued. Fontaine provides "no compelling reasons for the Court to decide differently than in the" separate case, the government said (Fontaine v. United States, CIT # 19-00154).
Non-importer companies looking to reap some of the tariff refunds should the Supreme Court eliminate tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act have limited options for asserting a legal right to the refund payments, various lawyers told us.
Camel Energy urged the Court of International Trade on Jan. 29 to compel the government to produce documents it withheld during discovery and provide CBP officer John Bristol for another four-hour deposition in the company's case against the seizure of its battery entries under the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (UFLPA) (Camel Energy v. United States, CIT # 25-00230).