The Court of International Trade has dismissed the case, International Labor Rights Fund et. al v.U.S., regarding the use of forced child labor in cocoa imported from the Cote d'Ivoire due to lack of standing.
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.
The Court of International Trade has ruled that it had no jurisdiction over claims brought by the plaintiffs Native Federation of the Madre de Dios River and Tributaries and the Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., et. al. related to bigleaf mahogany timber imports from Peru.
The International Trade Administration has issued a notice announcing that it is revoking the countervailing duty order on low enriched uranium from France pursuant to the ITA's recalculation of the subsidy rate on remand by the Court of International Trade.
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reviewed and affirmed the decision by the Court of International Trade in BASF Corporation (BASF) v. U.S. that Lucarotin 1%, a food colorant containing 1% beta-carotene, should be classified in HTS 3204.19.35 ("Beta-carotene and other carotene coloring matter").
In Brother International, Corp. ("Brother") v. U.S., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the Court of International Trade, ruling that a misclassification was due to a mistake of fact, and that subsequent legal analysis using the General Rules of Interpretation did not make it a mistake of law.
In U.S. v. Ford Motor Company (Ford I), the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) addressed Ford's practices related to providing information to Customs regarding post-importation adjustments to declared values of merchandise. The case concerned both "assists" (items incorporated into the imported merchandise which are provided by the buyer of the merchandise at reduced or no cost) and "direct" or "lump-sum" payments by the buyer (such as amounts paid pursuant to variable pricing agreements), all of which are dutiable.
In U.S. v. Ford Motor Company (Ford II), the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) reviewed a case similar to Ford I. In this case, Ford appealed a decision of the Court of International Trade (CIT), where Ford had been determined to have committed "gross negligence" by misrepresenting the value on entries covering tooling and stamping dies, which violated 19 USC 1484 and 1485.
The International Trade Administration (ITA) has issued an amendment to the final antidumping (AD) duty determination on carbazole violet pigment 23 from China in order to revise the AD duty rates of four companies, as well as the China-wide entity rate, as there is now a final and conclusive court decision in the proceeding.
The Department of Commerce (Commerce) has announced its preliminary decision to apply U.S. anti-subsidy law to imports from China. According to Commerce, the decision alters a 23-year policy of not applying the CV duty law to non-market economy (NME) countries, and reflects China's economic development.