CBP Settles Lawsuit Over Seizures Related to Section 337 Exclusion Order, Agrees to Release Shipments
CBP and One World Technologies have agreed to settle a lawsuit on the agency’s seizures of the company’s imported garage door openers, the Court of international Trade said as it dismissed the case May 9. The settlement comes after an International Trade Commission administrative law judge recommended the ITC find the redesigned garage door openers aren’t covered by a Section 337 limited exclusion order issued in March 2018 (see 1803280024).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
One World Technologies had already won an injunction barring CBP from seizing any more of its shipments (see 1901030004). CBP had seized the entries under a ruling that the trade court found did not directly apply to One World’s redesign. One World subsequently won a second injunction after CBP proceeded to seize another four shipments after CIT’s first court order.
The terms of the settlement agreement include the conditional release of those four shipments, all entered in January, as well as the conditional release of all future shipments of One World’s redesigned garage door openers, CIT said. As part of the dismissal, CBP and One World Technologies asked CIT to dismiss the case, and CIT granted the request. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has also dismissed a CBP appeal at the agency’s request, though appeals filed by the International Trade Commission and Chamberlain, the patent holder in the dispute, remained pending as of May 9.
Chamberlain argued against the dismissal, arguing the ITC should issue its final decision on the redesign before any action is taken. But CBP said its decision to settle and voluntarily dismiss the case is based on the reasoning behind the administrative law judge’s recommendation, and not the ITC decision itself. In any case, as a defendant-intervenor, Chamberlain does not have the ability to challenge the position taken by the defendant in the case, the trade court said.
(One World Techs. Inc. v. U.S., Slip Op. 19-56, CIT # 19-00017, dated 05/09/19, Judge Choe-Groves)
(Attorneys: Jason White of Morgan Lewis for plaintiff One World Technologies, Inc.; Guy Eddon for defendant U.S. government; Sidney Rosenzweig for defendant-intervenor ITC; Joseph Colaianni Jr. for defendant-intervenor the Chamberlain Group, Inc.)