In oral argument held Jan. 8, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit indicated that it preferred the government’s stricter interpretation of the statute governing automatic liquidation of drawback claims over an importer’s more expansive one (Performance Additives v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 24-2059).
In a Jan. 5 reply, importer Scottsdale Tobacco disagreed that it hadn’t offered the necessary documentation to support a substitution of unused merchandise drawback for certain 2018 and 2019 entries -- it had done so in its motion for judgment, which was all it needed to do for an issue the Court of International Trade hears de novo, it said (Scottsdale Tobacco v. United States, CIT # 24-00022).
Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top 20 stories published in 2025. All articles can be found by searching on the titles or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference numbers.
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 following lawsuits were filed recently at the Court of International Trade:
The U.S. agreed to grant a drawback claim for an entry of a luxury Porsche 911 Turbo S vehicle, according to a stipulated judgment filed on Dec. 22 at the Court of International Trade (Timothy Brown v. United States, CIT # 20-03733).
Four related exporters, led by Assan Aluminyum Sanayi ve Ticaret, filed a stipulation of dismissal in an antidumping duty case it filed earlier this year at the Court of International Trade (Assan Aluminyum Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. v. United States, CIT # 25-00137).
In a Dec. 1 cross-motion for judgment, the U.S. said certain 2018 and 2019 cigarette entries imported by Scottsdale Tobacco didn’t qualify for a substitution of unused merchandise drawback because it hadn’t provided the necessary paperwork to prove its claim. Further, the government said, the drawback claim hadn’t automatically liquidated, either (see 2508250048) (Scottsdale Tobacco v. United States, CIT # 24-00022).
CBP lacked the authority to reliquidate three drawback claims regarding three jewelry entries made by Importer Zale Delaware, since the drawback claims deemed liquidated, Zale argued in a Nov 24 complaint at the Court of International Trade (Zale Delaware v. United States, CIT # 25-00139).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Nov. 20 scheduled a case concerning deemed liquidation of duty drawback claims for oral argument on Jan. 8 (Performance Additives v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 24-2059).