Brian Feito

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of March 20-26:

Lawyers for South Korean exporters slammed a purported attempt by the White House to influence an ongoing Commerce Department antidumping duty administrative review, in several briefs filed with the agency March 16. The emailed memorandum sent March 2 by National Trade Council Director Peter Navarro to Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross improperly applied political pressure to what is supposed to be an impartial process, said the lawyers, who represent exporters of oil country tubular goods from South Korea.

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of March 13-19:

Another customs broker recently agreed to additional requirements for validation of powers of attorney as part of a settlement of a trademark lawsuit with Nike. Like the recent settlement between Nike and Alto Customhouse Brokers (see 1702140037), a settlement reached in December in Los Angeles federal court between Nike and KAL America requires the customs brokerage to validate all new powers of attorney it receives from importers by means of notarization, phone calls and checking government-issued IDs. The settlement ends one of the few remaining of a series of trademark cases brought by Nike against customs brokers. Nike has over time moved away from the practice, according to customs lawyers familiar with the issue.

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of March 6-12:

Importers will soon see a “more stringent” enforcement environment and more focus on compliance as CBP expands its data collection and the Centers of Excellence and Expertise program matures, said David Forgue, a customs lawyer with Barnes Richardson, at the Georgetown Law Center International Trade Update on March 10. More data and industry expertise will allow CBP to better target importers and discover compliance issues even before the importer has a chance to discover and correct them, he said.

No new lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Feb. 27 - March 5, nor were any appeals of CIT decisions filed at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit during that week.

Trade groups called for simplification of the tariff schedule and alignment of free trade agreements, in recent comments to the International Trade Commission. The complicated provisions of Chapter 64 create perverse incentives for shoe designers, the Footwear Distributors and Retailers of America (FDRA) said. Misaligned free trade agreements cause importers not to use trade programs, the American Apparel & Footwear Association (AAFA) said. And differences between how countries classify semiconductors creates a compliance burden for semiconductor importers, the Semiconductor Industry Association (SIA) said. The comments were submitted for an annual ITC report on import restraints (see 1610120051).

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Feb. 20-26:

Christmas and Thanksgiving dinners are not religious or cultural rituals for the purposes of tariff classification, the Court of International Trade said in a decision issued March 1 (here). That being the case, Christmas and Thanksgiving-themed dinnerware imported by WWRD should be classified according to its constituent materials, instead of alongside Seder plates and menorahs in a special duty-free tariff subheading for articles used in specific religious or cultural ritual celebrations, CIT said.