U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) states that it has removed from its Web site the Informed Compliance Publications (ICPs) on (1) classification of marble, and (2) enforcement of intellectual property rights (IPR).
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.
In U.S. v. Ford Motor Company (Ford), the Court of International Trade (CIT) granted Ford's motion to dismiss certain U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) claims for a repayment of duties in the amount of $5,275,329 under 19 USC 1592(d), as the statute of limitations had expired.
In June 2005, the Court of International Trade ruled in International Custom Products (ICP), Inc. v. U.S., that a U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Notice of Action (Rate Advance) reclassifying certain "white sauce" is null and void as CBP failed to observe 19 USC 1625(c) which requires, among other things, advance notice and comment when such an action would revoke or modify a binding ruling.
On February 16, 2006, the International Trade Administration (ITA) issued a notice amending its final affirmative antidumping (AD) duty determination for silicon metal from Russia, as there is now a final and conclusive court decision in this case.
In 2005, the Court of International Trade (CIT) ruled in U.S. v. Pan Pacific Textile Group et al. (Pan Pacific), that the principal is responsible for unpaid duties under 19 CFR 1592(d) stemming from fraudulent customs violations by his agent, who was the "importer of record" for certain tracksuits imported from China.
In Ammex, Inc. v. U.S., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) affirmed a Court of International Trade (CIT) ruling that U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) wrongly revoked permission for Ammex to sell fuel from its duty-free store (a Class 9 Customs bonded warehouse) at Ambassador Bridge, where all products are sold to be exported.
In Xerox Corporation v. U.S., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) ruled that the Court of International Trade (CIT) was correct in dismissing Xerox's protest of U.S. Customs and Border Protection's (CBP's) liquidation of 21 entries of electrostatic photocopiers and wire harnesses from Mexico, as Xerox did not timely file claims for NAFTA preferential treatment.
The International Trade Administration (ITA) has amended its final results of the antidumping (AD) duty new shipper review of honey from China for the period of December 1, 2001 through May 31, 2002 in light of the Court of International Trade's (CIT's) final and conclusive decision in Wuhan Bee v. U.S.
Recent CIT Rulings on Classification of Certain Tabletop Fountains and Incorrect Duty Rate in Ruling
Classification of certain tabletop fountains as pumps. In Conair Corporation v. U.S., the Court of International Trade (CIT) agreed with the importer and ruled that certain tabletop fountains known as "Serenity Ponds" are classifiable under HTS 8413.70.2004 as "submersible pumps," which are duty-free.
In Orlando Food Corp. v. U.S., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) has reversed a Court of International Trade (CIT) decision, ruling that the U.S. government must pay interest to Orlando in connection with the refund of overpaid duties on a 1989 entry.