In a case involving U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s tariff classification, and denial of eligibility for NAFTA duty-free entry, of plaintiff’s candied peanuts imported from Mexico in 2007, the Court of International Trade dismissed Rogelio Salazar Cavazos’ claims regarding CBP’s denial of his requested NAFTA importation duty refund claims. CIT said it had no jurisdiction over the matter because Salazar never filed a protest with CBP over its determination of the goods’ NAFTA eligibility. Salazar’s HTS classification protest did not likewise cover NAFTA eligibility, it said, and he was eligible to file a second protest, contrary to his arguments. However, Salazar’s claims challenging CBP’s tariff classification of the goods fall within its jurisdiction, CIT said, because he filed a valid protest that CBP denied, and so did not dismiss those claims.
The Court of International Trade sustained the final results of the International Trade Administration’s 2007-08 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on floor-standing, metal-top ironing tables and certain parts thereof (A-570-888), after Home Products International, which had in April been granted a motion for reconsideration of an aspect of the final results that had resulted in a remand to the ITA, withdrew its challenge. CIT ordered all entries enjoined by this action to be liquidated.
American Seafoods Co. and Pacific Longline Co., both of Seattle, agreed to phase out the use of ozone depleting refrigerants, implement a comprehensive leak detection and repair program aboard a number of their vessels and pay a penalty to resolve federal Clean Air Act violations, including the illegal import of ozone-depleting refrigerants, the Environmental Protection Agency said. The consent decree was lodged at the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington in Seattle. The EPA said that, between 2006 and 2009, American Seafoods and Pacific Longline imported and used 70,000 kg of R-22 refrigerant without holding valid allowances.
In a reversal of its previous ruling on the issue, the Court of International Trade agreed to consider the all others rate of 137.65% from the preliminary countervailing duty determination of aluminum extrusions from China (C-570-968), in light of the fact that, although the preliminary determination is not a final agency decision, it carries force because cash deposits are collected from the time of the preliminary determination in antidumping and countervailing duty investigations.
The Court of International Trade sustained the International Trade Administration’s second remand redetermination of the final results of its new shipper review of the antidumping duty order on fresh garlic from China (A-570-831) with respect to Chinese plaintiff Jinxiang Heija Co. Having been ordered to explain the greater weight given to Indian price quotes used to determine normal value that the ITA had found, as opposed to the Indian price quotes found by Heija, the ITA, under protest, afforded all of the price quotes equal weight by using a simple average to determine normal value. Heija’s AD rate fell from 15.37% to zero as a result of the recalculation. Heija did not challenge the ITA’s redetermination, and the CIT found the challenges of U.S. defendant-intervenors lacked merit, and sustained the ITA’s redetermination.
A $6.3 million settlement was reached Monday to resolve claims that companies misclassified auto parts manufactured in China and imported to the U.S. to evade $2.5 million in duties, said Immigrations and Customs Enforcement. Six companies from the U.S. and China, as well as two named individuals, allegedly violated the False Claims Act by knowingly misclassifying auto manifolds to obtain a duty rate of zero, ICE said, while charging its customers the correct duty of 2.5%, and retaining as "profit" the duty that should have been paid to U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Between June 2004 and June 2011, the U.S. alleged that the company evaded $2,549,000 worth of duties on 706 entries involving manifolds valued at $102 million.
The Court of International Trade ordered the International Trade Administration to redetermine or further explain some aspects of its 2008 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on wooden bedroom furniture from China (A-570-890), including, among other issues, the ITA’s use of zeroing (on voluntary remand), aspects of Chinese manufacturer Fairmont’s1 partial adverse facts available (AFA) rate, some surrogate values used by the ITA to determine wages for respondents, including the use of Indian wage data, and some financial statements relied on by the ITA in its calculations.
Six people were indicted in federal court Friday for operating a smuggling ring that illegally imported cigarettes from Vietnam, said Immigrations and Customs Enforcement. The 18-count indictment alleges the six defendants conspired between July 2010 and May 2012 to fraudulently import, receive, possess, conceal, buy and sell contraband cigarettes from Vietnam, said ICE, and the charges carry possible maximum penalties varying from 5 to 20 years imprisonment, a $250,000 fine (per count charged), three years of supervised release, and special assessment fees.
The Court of International Trade sustained the International Trade Administration's recalculation of two Chinese companies' labor surrogate values in the final results of the ITA's 2001-02 administrative review of the antidumping order on fresh garlic from China (A-570-831). The ITA requested the voluntary remand in response to a challenge by Jinan Yipin Corporation, Ltd. and Shandong Heze International Trade and Developing Company, in light of the appeals court’s holding in Dorbest Ltd. v. U.S. that the ITA’s former regression-based calculation methodology was contrary to law. Plaintiffs agreed with the redetermined surrogate value.
The Court of International Trade granted stays in six proceedings pending resolution of the appeal in the Union Steel v. U.S. case regarding zeroing in administrative reviews. The six proceedings challenge the International Trade Administration’s use of zeroing in the 2004-05, 2005-06, and 2008-09 administrative reviews of the antidumping duty order on ball bearings and parts thereof from France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Singapore, and the U.K. CIT said the AD administrative reviews concern different antidumping duty orders and administrative reviews than are involved in the Union Steel case, but both cases raise the same general issue of the permissibility under current law of the ITA’s application of the zeroing methodology in an administrative review.