Interest on past due customs duties and fees are subject to the same protest and judicial challenge procedures as those for any other duty or fee, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said on May 26 (here). Affirming a Court of International Trade ruling from August 2015 (see 1508200013), the appeals court held that, because interest on past due bills is protestable, American Home Assurance Company (AHAC) waived its right to challenge CBP’s interest calculations because it did not file a court challenge on a denied protest of the interest by the applicable deadline.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of May 15-21:
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of May 8-14:
A Singaporean man was sentenced to 40 months in prison for his role in a conspiracy involving radio frequency modules to be illegally exported to Iran, the Department of Justice said in a news release (here). The Bureau of Industry and Security posted the announcement on May 9. Singapore citizen Steven Lim pleaded guilty on Dec. 15, 2016, to conspiracy to defraud the U.S. by dishonest means, DOJ said. The U.S. will deport Lim when he completes his sentence. Lim admitted that between August 2007 and February 2008, he and others caused 6,000 modules to be bought and exported through Singapore, and later to Iran, in five shipments, knowing the export of the goods to Iran was a violation of U.S. law, DOJ said. For every transaction, Lim and others made misrepresentations and false statements to the involved Minnesota-based firm that Singapore was the final destination of the goods. Lim and others also caused false documents to be filed with the U.S. government, DOJ said. After the modules arrived in Singapore, they were stored at a freight forwarding company until they were aggregated with other electronic components and shipped to Iran, DOJ said.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of May 1-7:
Duracell filed a lawsuit on April 27 accusing JRS Ventures of trademark infringement and unfair competition related to its imports of gray market Duracell batteries, according to a complaint filed in Northern Illinois U.S. District Court. Duracell says JRS Ventures has been importing batteries manufactured in China and marked as for original equipment use only. The batteries are intended to be sold to other manufacturers for direct incorporation into their products, and not for importation into the U.S. and sale to consumers, Duracell said. The packaging on the batteries lacks information for consumers, including Duracell’s guarantee and customer service number, it said. Duracell’s demand to stop selling the batteries was rejected by JRS Ventures, the complaint said. Duracell seeks an injunction against JRS Ventures, as well as damages.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of April 24-30:
Import Merchandising Concepts and two company employees will pay $275,000 to "resolve allegations that the company improperly evaded customs duties on imports of wooden bedroom furniture" from China, the Justice Department said in a May 1 news release (here). The employees, Glen Michaels and Alan Lewis, were alleged to have misclassified imported furniture between 2009 and 2014 as non-bedroom furniture to evade a 216% antidumping duty, the DOJ said. “Those who import and sell foreign-made goods in the United States must comply with the law, including laws intended to protect domestic companies and American workers from unfair foreign competition,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General-DOJ Civil Division Chad Readler. “This settlement reflects the Department of Justice’s commitment to pursue those who seek to evade import duties owed on goods manufactured abroad thereby gaining an unfair advantage in U.S. markets.” The settlement marks one of several involving dormitory furniture (see 1610010008). "The claims resolved by this settlement are allegations only; there has been no determination of liability," the DOJ release says.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of April 17-23:
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of April 10-16: