A Florida man pleaded guilty Dec. 27 to scheming to illegally import dinosaur fossils that had been smuggled out of Mongolia and China, said Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Between 2010 and 2012, Eric Prokopi, of Gainesville, Fla., acquired dinosaur fossils from foreign countries and unlawfully transported them to the U.S., misrepresenting the contents of shipments on customs forms, according to the plea, ICE alleged.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit declined to hold an en banc review of the court's previous decision against Ancient Coin Collectors Guild (ACCG), which sued CBP over import restrictions. That court in October sided with the Justice Department in a suit filed by the ACCG over the implementation of import restrictions on cultural property from China and Cyprus. The ACCG filed the original suit in the U.S. District Court of Maryland after CBP stopped the 2009 import of coins over violations of the Cultural Property Implementation Act (CPIA). The district court said neither the State Department nor CBP had exceeded their authority.
The Court of International Trade denied the government’s motion to dismiss, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, an action brought by Michaels Stores challenging allegedly incorrect antidumping duty assessment instructions sent to CBP by the International Trade Administration. The government argued that Michaels is challenging CBP’s action, so the suit should have been filed under 28 USC 1581(a) customs protest denial jurisdiction. CIT said Michaels was instead challenging the International Trade Administration’s action, considering that the ITA issued the instructions, and said the suit was correctly filed under 28 USC 1581(i) residual jurisdiction as a challenge of the ITA’s administration and enforcement of trade laws.
A waste-recycling company based in Englewood, Colo., and two of its executives, were convicted Dec. 21 of multiple counts of mail and wire fraud, obstruction and environmental crimes related to illegally disposing electronic waste and smuggling, said Immigrations and Customs Enforcement. Executive Recycling Inc. and its officers allegedly defrauded government and businesses by saying that it was disposing of cathode ray tubes (CRT) using Environmental Protection Agency-approved methods in the U.S., while it was actually exporting the waste abroad.
The Court of International Trade rejected plaintiff Tianjin Magnesium International’s request for reconsideration of CIT’s Nov. 21 affirmance of a remand redetermination of the 2008-09 antidumping administrative review of pure magnesium from China (A-570-832). In affirming the remand, CIT had said TMI committed fraud during the AD review in an attempt to obtain lower dumping margins, and continued its misleading conduct during the court case by continuing to argue points that it had failed to exhaust during the review, ordering TMI to pay costs. Despite its failure to comment on the remand redetermination, TMI requested reconsideration because it said it had no opportunity to comment. CIT rejected that argument, noting that the schedule for a response had been extended at TMI’s request. “As a final courtesy, TMI is once again warned that its frivolous conduct is unacceptable and potentially within the scope of the court’s authority to impose sanctions,” threatened CIT.
The Court of International Trade remanded aspects of the 2008-09 antidumping administrative review of tapered roller bearings from China (A-570-601), including the International Trade Administration’s determination that respondent Peer Bearing Company-Changshan’s (CPZ) bearings processed in Thailand are of Chinese origin, and are therefore subject merchandise. The ITA relied on irrelevant criteria in finding the bearings to be of Chinese origin, such as whether the Thai bearings were of the same “class or kind” of merchandise as the Chinese parts, CIT said. The agency also failed to back up its claim that the Thai processing did not add significant value, it said. CIT ordered the ITA to rely only on “criteria relevant to whether the parts exported to Thailand were substantially transformed” in its redetermination.
The Court of International Trade sustained the partial application of adverse facts available (AFA) to determine Mueller Comercial’s AD rate, despite Mueller’s full cooperation, in the 2008-09 antidumping administrative review of circular welded non-alloy steel pipe from Mexico (A-201-805). The International Trade Administration had used AFA on incomplete cost data needed from one of Mueller’s suppliers. CIT agreed with the ITA’s argument that the uncooperative supplier would have benefited from a lower AD rate without the partial application of AFA, and said its use was justified, despite the fact that Mueller cooperated.
The Court of International Trade ordered a customs broker to pay a $19,000 penalty for violations of several provisions of the Customs regulations, including failing to notify the importer of record when doing business with an unlicensed person; conducting business without a valid power of attorney; misclassification of entries; and failure to exercise due diligence and responsible supervision and control. The customs broker failed to respond to any of CBP’s pre-penalty notices, penalty notices, and final demands for payments, and did not respond to any notices or motions in this case, so was declared to be in default. As the defendant was in default, CIT took all of CBP’s factual allegations as true, and granted CBP’s motion to collect the penalties.
Two Singaporeans were extradited from Singapore to stand trial in Washington, D.C., in connection with an alleged fraud conspiracy involving the unlawful export of 55 military antennas from the U.S. to Singapore and Hong Kong, said the Bureau of Industry and Security.
Eli Lilly agreed to pay over $29 million without admitting or denying allegations that it violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) through improper payments to foreign government officials to win millions of dollars of business in Russia, Brazil, China, and Poland, said the Securities and Exchange Commission in a press release. Eli Lilly used a Russian subsidiary to pay millions of dollars to third parties chosen by government customers or distributors that rarely provided any services and in some cases funneled money to government officials, according to the SEC complaint against the pharmaceutical company. Transactions with offshore or government-affiliated entities did not receive specialized or closer review for possible FCPA violations, said the SEC. Paperwork was accepted at face value and little was done to assess whether the terms or circumstances surrounding a transaction suggested the possibility of foreign bribery, it said.