US Says No CIT Jurisdiction in Suit on Seized Tires Since DOT Made Admissibility Decision

The U.S. on July 1 claimed that the provision of customs law establishing deemed liquidation except where the determinations of admissibility are vested in an agency other than CBP "broadly applies" to all agencies that can make admissibility determinations and not just those capable of carrying them out (Inspired Ventures v. U.S., CIT # 24-00062).

Responding to arguments from importer Inspired Ventures, the government said that 19 U.S.C. § 1499(c) -- the law carving out this exception to deemed liquidation -- allows for CBP to effectuate the admissibility decisions of agencies other than USDA and FDA -- the only other two capable of detaining imports.

Inspired Ventures brought its case to CIT in March contesting CBP’s refusal to release two tire entries (see 2403140043). In response, the U.S. moved to dismiss, claiming that because the entries were ordered seized by the Department of Transportation, CBP had made no protestable decision that could be challenged at the trade court (see 2405140063).

Inspired Ventures replied that Section 1499(c) doesn't apply because DOT doesn't have independent authority to make admissibility determinations, and even if it did, DOT here recommended only seizure, but CBP made the admissibility decision (see 2406110071). The U.S. said these contentions don't "reflect the circumstances of this case."

The government argued that the importer's read on the law "runs counter to its plain language, the pertinent legislative history, relevant Court decisions," DOT's "statutory mandate to monitor noncompliant imports of motor vehicle equipment," and 19 U.S.C. § 1595(c) -- the law that says that goods can be seized if their import is subject to any restriction imposed by law related to health, safety or conservation.

The U.S. said all of these factors "contemplate that CBP may effectuate detentions and seizures on behalf of other agencies" -- here, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration -- "that are vested with determining the admissibility of merchandise."

The brief argued that Inspired Ventures "fails to square, let alone discuss, its narrow interpretation of the exception to section 1499(c) with NHTSA’s statutory mandate to ensure that automotive imports into the United States comply with all applicable Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS)." The importer ignores that DOT sent CBP determinations on the admissibility of the company's tires and that CBP effectuated the determinations by seizing the entries.

While only CBP can detain or seize the entries, "it does not follow that when CBP detains or seizes merchandise on behalf of, or based upon, another agency’s determination of admissibility in the first instance, that CBP is also vested with determining the admissibility of the merchandise," the government said.

The U.S. also sought to address Inspired Ventures' procedural claims, which the government said are "irrelevant" since the court doesn't have jurisdiction over the entries given that "no protestable deemed exclusions have occurred."