The Transportation Department doesn't have "vested authority" to determine whether to admit entries of goods based on whether they comport with federal safety standards, the Court of International Trade held on Oct. 30. Judge Lisa Wang said that, as a result, CBP has the relevant admissibility authority and the trade court can hear the case.

Importer Portmeirion Group USA dropped its customs case at the Court of International Trade on Oct. 28, filing a notice of dismissal. The company brought the suit in 2021 to reclassify its ceramic tableware and kitchenware imports under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 6911.10.3850, dutiable at 6%, or subheading 6912.00.3950, dutiable at 4.5%. Counsel for the importer declined to comment (Portmeirion Group USA v. United States, CIT # 21-00179).

Two more complaints from Chinese high protein content pea protein exporters (see 2410230049) and an importer hit the Court of International Trade on Oct. 25, this time challenging the International Trade Commission’s final affirmative critical circumstances determination regarding pea protein from China (NURA USA v. U.S., CIT # 24-00182; Jianyuan International v. U.S., CIT # 24-00184).

The United States sought to recover more than $22 million from an importer who it said fraudulently dodged antidumping duties on wooden bedroom furniture from China (U.S. v. Lawrence Bivona, CIT # 24-00196).

The Court of International Trade on Oct. 28 denied importer Retractable Technologies' motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction against the collection of certain Section 301 tariffs, though the court granted the company's motion for a preliminary injunction enjoining liquidation of its entries during the course of litigation. Judge Claire Kelly issued the confidential decision, giving the parties until Nov. 1 to review any confidential information in the opinion (Retractable Technologies v. U.S., CIT # 24-00185).

The Commerce Department on Oct. 28 continued to reject separate rate status for exporters Mayrun Tyre (Hong Kong), Shandong Hengyu Science & Technology Co., Winrun Tyre Co., Shandong Wanda Boto Tyre Co. and Shandong Linglong Tyre Co. in the 2016-17 review of the antidumping duty order on passenger vehicle and light truck tires from China (YC Rubber Co. (North America) v. U.S., CIT # 19-00069).

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 continued to include importer Elysium Tiles' composite tile within the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on ceramic tile from China. Submitting remand results to the Court of International Trade on Oct. 29, Commerce said that the imports' marble top layer doesn't remove the tile from the scope of the orders, which covers "ceramic tile with decorative features" (Elysium Tiles v. United States, CIT # 23-00041).

The Court of International Trade on Oct. 30 rejected the government's bid to dismiss importer Inspired Ventures' case challenging the exclusion of two of its tire entries from China for violating Transportation Department regulations. CBP said CIT didn't have jurisdiction to hear the case since the DOT made the admissibility decision and an entry at issue was seized, not excluded. Judge Lisa Wang disagreed, saying CBP, not DOT, has the vested authority to determine admissibility and that the entries were in fact excluded and not seized.

The Court of International Trade on Oct. 28 dismissed exporter Yantai T.Full Biotech Co.'s antidumping case for failure to prosecute. The exporter didn't file a complaint within the period prescribed by the statute. The company filed its suit in September to contest the Commerce Department's antidumping duty investigation on pea protein from China (Yantai T.Full Biotech Co. v. United States, CIT # 24-00183).