Second Nature Pushes Back Against US Bid to Force Complaint in Botanical Products Customs Case

The Court of International Trade should deny a motion by the Government that would force importer Second Nature to file a complaint in a case concerning the proper classification of imported botanical products, according to a July 20 motion by Second Nature (Second Nature Designs Ltd. v. United States, CIT #17-00131).

Second Nature argues that the court should instead designate Second Nature Designs Ltd. v. United States, CIT #17-00271 as a test case (see 2206140022), noting that the test case procedures "provide a more orderly way to proceed than does the Government’s proposal to duplicate litigation."

Second Nature concedes that the law provides defendants wishing to proceed quickly "and with good cause" the ability to demand a complaint be filed. However, Second Nature says that upon reviewing the record, it has never found the court ruling "what constitutes good cause in such scenarios."

The government itself admits that a separate case "would be time intensive and require extensive discovery," and therefore waste judicial time and resources. Because the proposed test case is "likely to resolve" most issues which could be raised, including counterclaims, Second Nature argues that its proposal is a better use of the court's time.

The law requires that a defendant demanding a complaint must want to "proceed expeditiously.” Second Nature cites its arguments that the government used delaying tactics in a similar case (see 2203020065) to show that swift action by the government seems unlikely. Finally, in response to the government's claim that separate cases are required to “clarify which questions of fact and law are at issue," Second Nature says that a suspended case only needs to have a single question of law or fact in common with the test case, which, in this case is the possible tariff classifications.