CAFC Dismisses Estee Lauder and Container Store Appeals

The case of Estee Lauder vs. the U.S. was dismissed March 26 by the U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. In the case, the Court of International Trade ruled January 4 against U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s motion to dismiss the case, ruling that the court has jurisdiction. The CIT said CBP should have sought the necessary factual evidence to evaluate the protest.

The federal government appealed the decision March 5, but later decided to withdraw its appeal. Pisani & Roll, which handled the case for Estee Lauder, said the decision is important because historically U.S. Customs & Border Protection has taken a narrow view of classification rules for sets when a case or container is among the articles claimed to be a set.

“By dropping the appeal, the government agreed to follow the court’s decision in this case,” said Michael Roll, partner in Pisani & Roll, which handled the case. “It remains to be seen how the government will react in other cases involving carrying cases/containers.” The Justice Department lawyer handling the case for the government did not immediately respond to questions about why the government dropped the appeal.

(See ITT’s Online Archives 11030838 for summary of the Court of International Trade ruling January 4.)

In a separate case, the Court of Appeals dismissed another appeal of the Court of International Trade ruling in The Container Store v. U.S. CIT had said the elfa® system of top tracks and hanging standards is classifiable as duty-free unit furniture under heading 9403, and not as other mountings for furniture in heading 8302 because it’s designed to be hung, falls within an exception that includes it in the heading 9403 definition of furniture, and is qualified to be considered 9403 unit furniture.

(See ITT’s Online Archives 11103118 for summary of the CIT ruling).

As usual, the Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit provided no explanation for its dismissal decisions.