The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on April 6 denied a motion from the Coalition of Freight Coupler Producers to waive the court's redaction limits so as to hide the names of certain law firms and attorneys involved in the conflict-of-interest proceeding. Judge Evan Wallach said that the coalition's motion "does not even attempt" to show that the additional markings are needed "pursuant to a statute, administrative regulation, or court rule" (Amsted Rail Co. v. ITC, Fed. Cir. # 23-1355)
The Customs Rulings Online Search System (CROSS) was updated over the past week with the following headquarters rulings (ruling revocations and modifications will be detailed elsewhere in a separate article as they are announced in the Customs Bulletin):
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:
Hypodermic needle assemblies made in the U.S. by Cardinal Health from imported stainless steel needles and U.S.-made plastic parts keep the country of origin of the imported needles, CBP said in a recent ruling.
Entries of dual-stenciled pipe made before Commerce initiated a scope inquiry should be out of scope of an antidumping duty order on circular welded pipe, regardless of a pending appeal of that determination, Blue Pipe said in its March 29 reply brief at the Court of International Trade. Blue Pipe also continued to argue that all of its imported pipe is not within scope. Even if the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit finds the evasion determination was lawful, Blue Pipe asked it to overturn CBP’s decision to apply the evasion determination to entries made before Commerce initiated its scope inquiry (Blue Pipe Steel Center Co., Ltd. v. U.S., CIT # 21-00081).
Boronized steel tubes, originally classified by CBP as duty-free U.S. goods returned after repairs, are correctly classified as unfinished steel tubes and subject to Section 301 tariffs, DOJ argued in its March 31 motion at the Court of International Trade. The government asked the court to deny a motion by importer Maple Leaf Marketing to dismiss the government's counterclaim (Maple Leaf Marketing v. United State, CIT # 20-03839).
Electronic goods with Chinese components such as notebooks, laptops and modems reimported to the U.S after undergoing repairs in Mexico are still subject to Section 301 tariffs on the repairs, even though the repairs are duty free under USMCA, CBP said in a February ruling.
Court of International Trade can't issue a decision in a denied protest challenge based on a finding that can't determine the proper origin, Cyber Power Systems argued in a March 30 motion for reconsideration to CIT. Cyber Power asked the court for a partial retrial or rehearing of its Feb 27 ruling, in which CIT found that Cyber Power didn’t prove a substantial transformation occurred for four models of its uninterruptable power supplies and one model of its surge voltage protector (see 2302270064) (Cyber Power Systems v. U.S., CIT # 20-00124).
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York: