In BASF Corporation v. U.S., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit re-affirmed the decision by the Court of International Trade that an imported product identified as polyisobutylene-amine diluted in a saturated hydrocarbon solvent, with the trade name PURADD FD-100, is properly classified by its use, in HTS 3811.90.00.
Court of International Trade
The United States Court of International Trade is a federal court which has national jurisdiction over civil actions regarding the customs and international trade laws of the United States. The Court was established under Article III of the Constitution by the Customs Courts Act of 1980. The Court consists of nine judges appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate and is located in New York City. The Court has jurisdiction throughout the United States and has exclusive jurisdictional authority to decide civil action pertaining to international trade against the United States or entities representing the United States.
In U.S. Tsubaki, Inc. v. U.S., the Court of International Trade granted summary judgment to Customs for shipments of roller chain from Japan imported by Tsubaki, ruling that they were all subject to the liquidation procedures as provided for in the 1984 version of 19 USC 1504(d), and with an exception of five entries, they were not eligible to be deemed liquidated by operation of law.
In Value Vinyls, Inc. v. U.S., the Court of International Trade reconsidered its classification decision, but denied the request to amend or change its ruling that certain plastic-coated material should be classified under HTS 3921.90.11 with a duty rate of 4.2%.
In Whirlpool Corporation v. U.S., the Court of International Trade granted summary judgment to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, ruling that certain refrigerator control box subassemblies are an automatic controlling apparatus under HTS 9032.89.60 and subject to a duty rate of 1.7 percent.
In Rhodia, Inc. v. U.S., the Court of International Trade granted a summary judgment to Rhodia regarding an imported product identified as a "rare earth carbonate mixture" that consisted of various rare earth carbonates, rare earth ammonium double sulfates, water, and impurities, ruling that it should have been classified under HTS 3824.90.39 (1999).
In Michael Simon Design, Inc. v. U.S., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit re-affirmed the decision by the Court of International Trade (Slip Op. 06-128), that certain 2003 imports of sweaters decorated with certain Christmas or Halloween motifs were classified as "festive articles" under heading 9505 in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule.
In Shima American Corp. v. U.S., the Court of International Trade granted summary judgment to Customs on shipments of roller chain from Japan imported by Shima, ruling the entries were subject to the liquidation procedures as provided for in 19 USC 1504(d), and they were not eligible to be deemed liquidated by operation of law.
In Ford Motor Company v. U.S., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit agreed with Customs and reversed the Court of International Trade's decision on waiver procedures and Customs' ability to pursue civil penalties under 19 USC 1592.
According to Zisser Group and Global Data Mining, LLC, more than 40 importers, including Totes-Isotoner, Target (and its affiliate Associated Merchandising Corp.), Payless Shoesource, Asics, Columbia Sportswear, and Steve Madden have filed complaints with the U.S. Court of International Trade accusing the U.S. of gender and age discrimination in the tariffs its imposes on similar items of apparel, footwear, and gloves. These companies state that more than 2,200 pairs of HTS codes are impacted by discriminatory duties (over 300 for age discrimination and more than 1,900 for gender discrimination). (See ITT's Online Archives or 08/07/07 news, 07080725, for BP summary on Target's and Totes-Isotoner's cases.) (Full article available via email by sending a request to documents@brokerpower.com)
In Fuji America Corp. v. U.S., the Court of International Trade ruled that an imported machine identified as a "chip placer" and a part identified as a "feeder" were both properly classified under HTS heading 8479.