In BP Products North America Inc., v. U.S., the Court of International Trade ruled that a blended mixture of components known as 93 octane (premium grade) gasoline (“Conv. 93”) was properly classified as gasoline (motor fuel) under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 2710.11.15 at 52.5 cents per barrel.
Court of International Trade
The United States Court of International Trade is a federal court which has national jurisdiction over civil actions regarding the customs and international trade laws of the United States. The Court was established under Article III of the Constitution by the Customs Courts Act of 1980. The Court consists of nine judges appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate and is located in New York City. The Court has jurisdiction throughout the United States and has exclusive jurisdictional authority to decide civil action pertaining to international trade against the United States or entities representing the United States.
The Court of International Trade and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decided the following antidumping and countervailing duty law determinations in the second half of May 2010.
In National Fisheries III,1the Court of International Trade ordered CBP to again reconsider and recalculate the continuous bond requirement for certain importers of shrimp products subject to antidumping duty liability.
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has invalidated the International Trade Administration’s use of labor rate data from high-income countries in valuing merchandise imported from less developed non-market economies (NMEs), overturning an ITA regulation that increased dumping rates.
Totes-Isotoner Corporation has petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to review whether differences in customs duty rates, based on gender or age, violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution.
The Court of International Trade and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decided the following antidumping and countervailing duty law determinations in the first half of May 2010.
In a test case, CamelBak Products, LLC1, v. U.S., the Court of International Trade ruled in favor of Customs that CamelBak “Hydration Packs” or “Hydration Systems” are properly classified as “”travel, sports, and similar bags” under HTS subheading 4202.92.30 at 17.8%.
The Court of International Trade and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decided the following antidumping and countervailing duty law cases in the second half of April 2010.
In Hitachi Home Electronics (America), Inc., v. U.S., the Court of International Trade granted Customs’ motion to dismiss an action by Hitachi to challenge the rate of duty on imported plasma flat panel televisions, for lack of jurisdiction.
The Court of International Trade (CIT) and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) decided the following antidumping and countervailing duty law determinations in the first half of April 2010.