United States Court of International Trade

Court Denied Government’s Motion to Dismiss Regarding Protest Jurisdiction

In Aspects Furniture International, Inc. v. United States, Case No. 18-222, Slip Op. 19-78 (June 18, 2019), the government argued that Aspects Furniture International, Inc.’s (AFI’s) protest was not valid because it provided a lead entry in the protest and listed additional entries on the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE). The Government’s motion was based on a factually incorrect notion that AFI never protested the liquidation of the eight Contested Entries.

See Def.’s Mot. at 2 (“The protest did not seek relief for any other entry. . . . [T]he liquidation of [the Contested Entries] were [sic] never protested.”); id. at 3 (A protest that expressly covers the liquidation of a single entry cannot be expanded to cover liquidations that never challenged or even mentioned in the protest.”)

However, the Court disagreed. “Here, AFI adhered to Customs’ regulatory provisions regarding protesting multiple entries together when it included Entry No. W69-3325900-5 as the “lead entry” and manually added the Contested Entries in the ACE system along with their respective dates of entry and liquidation.” See id. at 12. The government’s motion to dismiss was denied and the Court has jurisdiction to hear this case under 28 U.S.C. §1581(a).