CIT Issues Opinions in Customs, Classification Penalty and AD Cases
The Court of International Trade released a trio of opinions Feb. 27, covering customs, import misclassification penalty and antidumping cases.
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.
In the customs classification case, brought by Cyber Power Systems (USA), Judge Leo Gordon held that one model of the importer's uninterruptible power supplies was properly marked as "Made in the Philippines," but the remaining four models of the supplies, plus one model of surge voltage protectors, should have been marked as "Made in China."
In the customs penalty case, Judge M. Miller Baker denied importer Crown Cork & Seal USA's bid to dismiss the government's fraud and gross negligence counts. The judge said the fraud claim is sufficiently specific and both claims clear the notice requirements of Rule 8 as set in the Bell Atlantic v. Twombly and Ashcroft v. Iqbal cases.
In the antidumping proceeding, Baker blasted the Commerce Department's use of a total adverse facts available rate of 154.33% for steel nail exporter Oman Fasteners over one 16-minute late submission, characterizing it as "the very definition of abuse of discretion." Lambasting Commerce's "draconian sanction" for which it "made no effort to justify," the judge consolidated Oman Fasteners' motion for a preliminary injunction with trial on the merits and granted judgment on the agency record. Baker enjoined Oman Fasteners from paying the cash deposits pending another order from the court.