In Structural Industries, Inc. v. U.S., the Court of International Trade (CIT), upon remand from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC), determined that three sizes of "Euro clip" picture frames, which consist of a flat glass cover, a masonite back, and four metal clips are classifiable under HTS 4414.00.0000 (3.9%), as wooden frames for paintings, photographs, mirrors or similar objects.
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.
On March 18, 2005, the Court of International Trade (CIT), among other things, denied the U.S. government's request that it dismiss with respect to jurisdictional issues a complaint filed by the U.S. Association of Importers of Textiles and Apparel (USA-ITA) that seeks review of CITA's decision to consider "threat-based" China textile safeguard petitions. The CIT also deferred ruling on the U.S.' motion to dismiss the case because of substantive claims.
The International Trade Administration (ITA) has published a notice in the Federal Register stating that on March 9, 2005 the Court of International Trade (CIT) affirmed the ITA's final results of redetermination on remand (remand results) with respect to certain stainless steel wire rod from Italy.
CIT rules CBP's decision not to delay ruling's effective date is appropriate. In Weslo, Inc. v. U.S., the Court of International Trade (CIT) found that U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) acted appropriately in its refusal to delay the effective date of HQ 089891, which classified certain electronic speedometer/tachometers imported to be incorporated into stationary exercise equipment under HTS 9506.91.00 (4.64% duty rate). Prior to this ruling, the merchandise had been classified, variously, under TSUS 711.98 (duty free), under HTS 9506.91.00, and under HTS 9029.20.40 (duty free), the last of which CBP indicated was a misclassification.
In Bauer Nike Hockey USA, Inc. v. U.S., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) ruled that certain imported hockey pants are classified as ice-hockey equipment under HTS 9506.99.25 rather than as sports clothing under HTS 6211.33.00, reversing an earlier Court of International Trade (CIT) decision which had classified the items under the latter heading.
The International Trade Administration (ITA) has issued a notice stating that on January 21, 2005, the Court of International Trade (CIT) affirmed the ITA's final results of redetermination on remand (remand results) with respect to tapered roller bearings and parts thereof, finished or unfinished from China.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has presented its final version of is new Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT) security standards for importers to the Departmental Advisory Committee on Commercial Operations of Customs and Border Protection and Related Functions (COAC). During the February 15, 2005 COAC meeting, CBP officials noted that they will also be issuing frequently asked questions (FAQs) and responses regarding the revised C-TPAT security standards. (See ITT's Online Archives or 01/13/05 news, 05011305, for BP summary of Draft 3 of CBP's new C-TPAT security standards for importers.)
According to a U.S. Association of Importers of Textiles and Apparel (USA-ITA) Textile Development Memo, on February 7, 2005, the government filed a motion with the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) seeking a 'stay' of the preliminary injunction (that prevents CITA from taking further action on threat-based China safeguard petitions), pending consideration of is appeal, which they also asked for from the CIT, and the CIT denied. (USA-ITA TDM, dated 02/10/05, www.usaita.com.)
According to a U.S. Association of Importers of Textiles and Apparel (USA-ITA) Textile Development Memo, on January 25, 2005, the government sent to the Court of International Trade (CIT) a notice stating its intention to file an appeal with the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) challenging the CIT"s preliminary injunction enjoining the Committee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements (CITA) from taking further action on threat-based China safeguard petitions. (See ITT's Online Archives or 01/04/05 news, 05010405, for BP summary on the CIT injunction.)(USA-ITA TDM, dated 01/26/05, www.usaita.com.)
The International Trade Administration (ITA) has published a notice in the Federal Register stating that on October 1, 2004 the Court of International Trade (CIT) issued an order sustaining the ITA's final results of redetermination on remand with respect certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from Thailand.