The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on Jan. 26 declined to dismiss a False Claims Act suit from a whistleblower that alleges her employer misclassified footwear to avoid tariffs. Magistrate Judge Robert Lehrburger said the fact none of the defendants served as the importer of record for the allegedly undervalued footwear imports is irrelevant for purposes of establishing liability under the FCA (United States ex rel. Devin Taylor v. GMI USA Corp., S.D.N.Y. # 16-7216).
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:
Importer MCM Technologies on Jan. 30 dismissed its suit challenging CBP's denial of its protest regarding the classification of its pet identification tags. The importer said the tags, which are classified under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 8302.49.4000, qualify for an exclusion from Section 301 tariffs under secondary subheading 9903.88.4800. Counsel for MCM Technologies declined to comment (MCM Technologies v. U.S., CIT # 22-00005).
Importer Nutricia North America will appeal a December Court of International Trade decision finding that the company's baby formula and vitamins should be classified as food and not as pharmaceutical products (see 2312050028). Nutricia will argue at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that its goods, which are meant as dietary supplements for people with disabilities or ailments, fit under duty-free heading 3004 for "mixed or unmixed products for therapeutic or prophylactic use" packaged for retail sale. CBP put the entries under heading 2106, dutiable at 6.4%, as "food preparations not elsewhere specified or included" (Nutricia North America v. United States, CIT # 16-00008).
Importer Scottsdale Tobacco launched a case at the Court of International Trade to contest CBP's denial of its drawback claim on its Canadian-origin paper-wrapped cigarettes. Filing a complaint on Jan. 30, the importer said its drawback claim "met the requirements" for a substitution unused merchandise drawback of the federal excise taxes it paid, since it exported the cigarettes from Florida less than five years after the relevant imports (Scottsdale Tobacco v. United States, CIT # 24-00022).
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Jan. 29 issued its mandate in a customs case on the classification of textile gloves with a plastic coating on the palm and fingers. The appellate court said the gloves fit under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 6116 as gloves and not as articles of plastic under heading 3926 (see 2312060028). Importer Magid argued that Section XI Note 1(h) excluded the gloves from heading 6116 and that the Federal Circuit's ruling in Kalle USA v. U.S., a case concerning sausage casing, precluded classification as textiles and apparel of Section XI (Magid Glove & Safety Manufacturing Co. v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 22-1793).
The U.S. and three importers filed a joint status report announcing they intend to settle several consolidated cases (see 2108190038) contesting the Commerce Department’s denials of the importers’ Section 233 steel tariff exclusion requests (Valbruna Slater Stainless.v. U.S., CIT #21-00027).
Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week, in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
The Court of International Trade on Jan. 30 said that for drawback purposes the 10-digit Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheadings should be read starting with their directly adjacent text and not the superior indented text. Judge Claire Kelly said the "plain meaning" of the statute governing substituted unused merchandise drawbacks refers to the "words describing the article adjacent to the 10-digit number."