Title: 2011 International Trade Law Decisions of the Federal Circuit
Abstract: INTRODUCTIONThe United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit occupies a unique position among the thirteen federal courts of appeals. Hearing cases nationwide, the Federal Circuit exercises jurisdiction over specific subject matters, including international trade, government contracts, patents, trademarks, certain money claims against the United States government, federal personnel, veterans benefits, and public safety officers' benefits claims.1 The Federal Circuit is frequently called upon to review decisions from the United States Court of International Trade, the United States Court of Federal Claims, the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, and federal district courts.2This Article provides a summary of the international trade cases appealed to the Federal Circuit from the United States Court of International Trade (CIT) and the United States International Trade Commission (ITC or Commission) during 2011. Twenty-four precedential decisions were issued, addressing United States Customs Laws, Trade Remedy Laws, and other international trade issues. Of the twenty-one precedential decisions arising from the CIT, the Federal Circuit affirmed nine and reversed or vacated eleven.3 Six of the cases involved challenges to tariffclassifications; three cases involved questions about the scope of the CIT's jurisdiction; one case involved jurisdictional issues in filing certificates of origin; four cases involved challenges to Commerce's authority to impose duties; five cases involved challenges to Commerce's methods of calculating duties, including its controversial practice of zeroing; and one case involved review of proceedings tainted by material fraud. Of the three precedential opinions arising from ITC decisions pursuant to Section 337 of the TariffAct of 1930, two ITC decisions were affirmed and one was vacated. 4This Article is divided into four sections: jurisdiction of the U.S. Court of International Trade, U.S. customs laws, antidumping and countervailing duties, and ITC section 337 cases. The cases involve the three federal agencies that often appear as parties before the Federal Circuit and CIT in trade disputes: United States Customs and Border Protection (Customs), the United States Department of Commerce (Commerce), and the ITC.I. JURISDICTION OF THE U.S. COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADEThe CIT is charged with exclusive jurisdiction to review a variety of trade-related issues pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1581. In particular, § 1581(i) provides for jurisdiction over any civil action commenced against the United States that arises out of any law providing for tariffs, duties, fees, or other taxes on the importation of merchandise.5 Although the residual jurisdictional provision of § 1581(i) grants broad jurisdiction to the CIT, the Federal Circuit has limited its scope by only allowing it to be invoked when jurisdiction is unavailable under another subsection.6In Hartford Fire Insurance Co. v. United States,7 the CIT dismissed a suit for lack of jurisdiction, holding that a surety was barred from suing to challenge its liability because it failed to timely file an administrative protest under 19 U.S.C. § 1514 and therefore could not bring suit under the residual jurisdiction provision of 28 U.S.C. § 1581(i).8 On appeal, the Federal Circuit questioned the CIT's determination that the surety's failure to comply with the protest period under 19 U.S.C. § 1514 barred jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1581(i) because the surety did not learn of the protest until after the statutory window had closed.9In this case, Sunline Business Solutions (Sunline) used a surety bond from the Hartford Fire Insurance Company (Hartford) to import frozen cooked crawfish from the People's Republic of China.10 Customs sought to obtain payment from Hartford when Sunline failed to pay antidumping duties levied on the transaction.11 Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1514, Hartford had 90 days from the demand of payment against its bonds to file an administrative protest, and it failed to meet the deadline. …
Publication Year: 2012
Publication Date: 2012-03-01
Language: en
Type: article
Access and Citation
AI Researcher Chatbot
Get quick answers to your questions about the article from our AI researcher chatbot