Seko Customs Brokerage, which had added staffing to handle Type 86 filings before it was suspended from the Type 86 program beginning May 27 (see 2405310031), filed a complaint on June 3 asking the Court of International Trade to force CBP to reinstate it through an injunction.
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.
The Court of International Trade on May 31 said that a duty drawback claim becomes deemed liquidated after one year if the underlying import entries are also liquidated and final, with finality defined as the end of the 180-day window in which to file a protest with CBP.
The Court of International Trade on May 28 rejected the government's motion for partial reconsideration of the court's decision finding that the government violated the "implied contractual term" of reasonableness in waiting eight years to demand payment from surety Aegis Security Insurance Co. on a customs bond.
The Court of International Trade on May 28 said the Commerce Department erred in revoking the antidumping duty orders on stilbenic optical brightening agents from Taiwan and China after it didn't receive a timely notice of intent to participate in the orders' sunset reviews from a domestic producer. Judge M. Miller Baker told Commerce to conduct the full sunset reviews since U.S. manufacturer Archroma U.S. filed substantive responses to the agency's notice of initiation of the sunset reviews.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the weeks of May 13-19 and May 20-26:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on May 15 said the scope of the antidumping duty order on circular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes from Thailand unambiguously includes dual-stenciled pipe, reversing the Court of International Trade's decision.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of May 6-12:
The Court of International Trade on May 9 allowed a case to proceed against the Commerce Department's pause of antidumping and countervailing duties on Southeast Asian solar panels, rejecting motions to dismiss from the government and nine solar cell importers and exporters.
The Court of International Trade ruled May 9 that an importer would recoup 22.4% of Section 301 duties it paid on an entry of kids’ erasable e-writing tablets from China.
The Commerce Department has published amended final results of the antidumping duty administrative review on oil country tubular goods from Ukraine (A-823-815) originally published Feb. 10, 2022. In that review, covering entries from the only company under review, Interpipe, from July 10, 2019, through June 30, 2020, Commerce set an AD rate of 27.8%. Interpipe consists of Interpipe Europe S.A./ Interpipe Ukraine LLC / PJSC Interpipe Niznedneprovsky Tube Rolling Plant (aka Interpipe NTRP) / LLC Interpipe Niko Tube.