Brian Feito

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Oct. 30-Nov. 5:

CBP will likely adopt a hybrid “dual calculation system” for drawback in ACE, with substitution drawback calculated using line item per unit average and invoice level calculations for direct identification drawback, the National Customs Brokers & Forwarders Association of America said in an emailed update on Nov. 6. The decision will have “significant implications,” because line items previously claimed using substitution drawback would be ineligible for direct identification drawback, and vice versa, the trade group said. CBP is also considering making all merchandise imported in any entry claimed in a drawback claim under the existing law unavailable for substitution drawback claims under the new procedures of the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015, it said.

The Food and Drug Administration will give food facilities that have co-manufacturing agreements with brand owners additional time to comply with certain Food Safety Modernization Act requirements for supply-chain programs, it said in a guidance document released Nov. 3. “FDA does not intend to take enforcement action for two years against a co-manufacturer that is not in compliance with certain supply-chain program requirements related to supplier approval and supplier verification,” the agency said in a constituent update. “This enforcement discretion is conditional on the supplier approval and verification activities being divided between the brand owner and the co-manufacturer.”

Santa Claus suits imported by Rubies Costume Company are classifiable in the tariff schedule as wearing apparel, not festive articles, the Court of International Trade said in an Oct. 31 decision. Though they may be festive articles because they are used only during the Christmas season, the Santa Claus suits are “fancy dress” excluded from duty free classification in Chapter 95 because they are durable items that will survive multiple wearings and cleanings, CIT said.

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Oct. 23-29:

The Court of International Trade is dealing with an increased case load, in part because of the executive branch’s newfound emphasis on trade enforcement, CIT Judge Leo Gordon said at an event hosted by the Case Western Reserve University law school on Oct. 27. The trade court is “seeing an uptick in the number of civil penalty and enforcement cases that are being brought at the court,” which, combined with an ever-increasing number of antidumping and countervailing duty orders, is putting a strain on the court’s resources, Gordon said.

The Commerce Department is still “in the process” of looking into self-initiation of antidumping and countervailing duty investigations, said Daniel Calhoun, assistant chief counsel for trade enforcement and compliance at Commerce, at an event hosted by Case Western Reserve University law school on Oct. 27. Should the agency “decide to do it,” self-initiation would allow investigations to occur in industries that are not well-placed to ask for duties, Calhoun said. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross in April said Commerce had “begun the process of self-initiating trade cases” (see 1704140002).

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Oct. 16-22:

A New York federal court recently ordered S’well Bottle to allow an importer to bring in water bottles that S’well alleges infringe its trademarks. ETS Express faces irreparable injury from CBP’s detention of its shipments in search of the allegedly counterfeit water bottles, and it’s unclear whether S’well’s trademarks are even enforceable, the Southern New York U.S. District Court said in a decision issued Oct. 10. The court also denied S’well’s request that ETS post a bond for future entries of the water bottles.

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Oct. 9-15: