Court-ordered reliquidations aren't actions taken by CBP and can't be protested, the government said in oral arguments held Dec. 6 before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. As a result, the Federal Circuit doesn't have jurisdiction to hear Target's appeal of a liquidation ordered by CIT, the U.S. said (Target v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-2274).

New Zealand conservation non-profit Maui and Hector's Dolphin Defenders NZ challenged the National Marine Fisheries Service's 2024 comparability findings on New Zealand's West Coast North Island set-net and trawl fisheries, alleging a host of analytical and legal violations committed by the agency. The group said the comparability findings fail to enforce the Marine Mammal Protection Act, further endangering the Maui dolphin -- an endangered species of which only an estimated 43 remain (Maui and Hector's Dolphin Defenders v. National Marine Fisheries Service, CIT # 24-00218).

A 2012 analysis memorandum from a prior antidumping duty determination should be put on the record of a suit on an anti-circumvention proceeding, the Court of International Trade held on Dec. 5. Granting the government's motion to complete the administrative record, Judge Stephen Vaden dubbed the spat "pedantic" and said the record "should be supplemented."

The Commerce Department’s self-developed “levels of trade” test doesn’t comport with U.S. law, especially since the Supreme Court's holding in Loper Bright, Spanish aluminum exporter Compania Valenciana de Aluminio Baux argued Nov. 27 in support of its June motion for judgment (see 2406130052) (Compania Valenciana de Aluminio Baux, S.L.U. v. United States, CIT # 23-00259).

Judges at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Dec. 4 questioned importer Nature's Touch Frozen Foods (West) and the government regarding the tariff classification of frozen fruit mixtures. Judge Todd Hughes led the bulk of the questioning, pushing Nature's Touch on how to classify the goods if the court finds that the mixtures aren't food preparations, as claimed by the company, and how they should be classified instead under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 0811, which covers certain frozen fruit (Nature's Touch Frozen Foods (West) v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-2093).

Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week, in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.

The Commerce Department properly picked the benchmark data for two subsidy programs received by respondent Jiangsu Zhongji Lamination Materials in the 2017-18 review of the countervailing duty order on aluminum foil from China, the Court of International Trade held in a decision made public Dec. 3.

The Court of International Trade has personal jurisdiction over exporter Koehler Oberkirch in the government's customs penalty suit against the exporter, since it's a successor to the company that owes nearly $200 million in unpaid antidumping duties, the U.S. said. Responding to Koehler's motion to dismiss, the U.S. said Koehler doesn't question that its allegations establish that Koehler Oberkirch's "spin-off" to Koehler Paper was "done to escape paying" the duties (United States v. Koehler Oberkirch, CIT # 24-00014).

Foreign-trade zone goods become "importations" for duty drawback purposes when they are admitted into an FTZ, rather than when they are entered for consumption into the U.S., the government told the Court of International Trade on Nov. 27, urging it to dismiss a lawsuit from importer King Maker Marketing challenging the rejection of its duty drawback claims. As a result, King Maker's drawback claims are untimely, since they were brought over five years since the underlying cigarette entries were admitted into the FTZ, the government said (King Maker Marketing v. United States, CIT # 24-00134).

Brandon Chen, who took the April 2022 customs broker license exam, appealed the final results of his exam to the Court of International Trade, contesting 11 questions that CBP denied him credit for. Filing a complaint at the trade court on Nov. 25, Chen noted that he is only two correct answers away from a passing score of 75% (Brandon Chen v. U.S., CIT # 24-00208).