Federal Court Denies Importer's Bid to Release Purported Cracked Corn Shipment Seized as Seed Corn
A federal court recently rejected an attempt by a Canada-based importer to get its rejected corn shipment released by CBP and the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. In an order dated April 20, the Eastern California U.S. District Court denied Sunrise Foods’ motion for a temporary restraining order for a shipment of corn purportedly from Turkey but later found to be of Russian, Moldovan and Kazakhstani origin. The court found Sunrise could not have been suffering too much, given the month it waited before requesting the TRO.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
According to court documents, the shipment had been hit with an Emergency Action Notification requiring it to be re-exported or destroyed five days after it was cleared through the Port of San Francisco in early March. CBP’s suspicions over the Turkish supplier were confirmed when a check of organic certificates revealed the true origin of the shipment. Seed corn is prohibited for importation from Russia, Moldova and Kazakhstan, and the corn did not meet requirements for “cracked corn,” which requires milling of uniform consistency, the government said in a brief. Roughly 46 percent to 56 percent of the corn kernels in a sample taken from the shipment were whole, it said.
Sunrise filed suit on March 29, 10 days after CBP told the importer its decision was final. It argues that the shipment was admissible regardless of origin because it qualified as cracked corn under the Federal Grain Inspection Service definition, and sought an order lifting the Emergency Action Notification. The government responded that APHIS is not bound by the FGIS definition, which is based on quality and not safety, and in any case that the shipment doesn’t meet the latter’s standard.
The court denied Sunrise’s motion, finding the importer did not meet the requirement that it suffer irreparable harm if no order is issued. “Sunrise has failed to demonstrate that a sufficient urgency exists to justify the imposition of a TRO. Sunrise was able to sustain approximately $11,500 in daily losses for nearly a month prior to seeking a TRO,” the court said, referring to the injury estimated by Sunrise itself in its complaint. There are also “numerous factual and legal disputes” that must be decided before granting “the ultimate relief,” it said. The court set a deadline of April 27 if Sunrise wants to request a preliminary injunction.
(Sunrise Foods International, Inc. v. Sonny Perdue, E.D. Cal. #18-00688, dated 04/20/18, Judge Mendez)
Email ITTNews@warren-news.com for a copy of the decision.