Opinion ID: 209941
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: The Court of International Trade Consolidates and Again Dismisses

Text: On remand, the Court of International Trade consolidated Shinyei's '130 case with Shinyei's three Customs-Error cases. The United States defended against the consolidated '130 case on the groundnot previously adjudicated by either the trial court or this courtthat Shinyei's entries were deemed liquidated on August 23, 1998, and that this deemed liquidation was final and conclusive, precluding Shinyei from thereafter claiming Commerce or Customs error in connection with the liquidated entries. In May of 2006, Shinyei filed a motion for partial summary judgment to dispose of this deemed-liquidation defense, agreeing that its entries were deemed liquidated (in 1998) before they were actually liquidated (beginning in 2000), but arguing that the deemed liquidation was no more final or conclusive than an actual liquidation as against Shinyei's claims. The United States opposed Shinyei's motion and filed a cross-motion for summary judgment on the basis of the deemed-liquidation defense. On April 20, 2007, the Court of International Trade ruled on the cross-motions for summary judgment, denying Shinyei's motion and granting summary judgment to the United States. Shinyei Corp. of Am. v. United States, 491 F.Supp.2d 1209, 1220 (2007) ( Shinyei-CIT(II) ). Despite having previously declined to consider the deemed-liquidation issue (and instead having held the actual liquidations effective), the court now changed course, holding that because Shinyei's entries were deemed liquidated by operation of law, the final duty [owed] by Shinyei was the rate and amount of duty deposited at the time of entry or withdrawal from warehouse, not the rate of duty determined by the administrative review. Id. at 1220 (emphasis in original). Concluding that the deemed liquidation was final, the court held that the deemed liquidation statute thus precluded review of Shinyei's APA claim regarding Commerce's liquidation instructions. The court also dismissed Shinyei's claims of Customs error, on the ground that Shinyei failed to file a timely administrative protest of the August, 1998 deemed liquidation. Over Shinyei's objection that Customs was required to give Shinyei notice of the deemed liquidation before the time to protest would commence, the court held that no such notice was required because [i]n the instant matter, Customs was not aware of the Deemed Liquidation, and thereby could not post notice in the Bulletin. Id. Further, in contrast to our statement in Shinyei-CAFC(I) that Shinyei had not slept on its rights, the Court of International Trade noted on remand that it was particularly troubled by Shinyei's delay in seeking relief. Shinyei-CIT(II), 491 F.Supp.2d at 1220. The court explained that in its view, Commerce's February 23, 1998 announcement of the Amended Review Results, published in the Federal Register, effectively put Shinyei on notice that its entries would be deemed liquidated in six months at the deposit rate unless Shinyei took action first. Therefore, the court wrote, Shinyei could have sought mandamus before August 23, 1998 to compel liquidation at the Amended Final Review rates. Id. Finally, the Court of International Trade granted summary judgment to the United States on a counterclaim, filed by the United States in one of the Customs-Error cases, seeking recovery of a refund Customs had given Shinyei upon granting one of Shinyei's protests in part. The court explained that because the entries in question had already been liquidated by operation of law, and at the duty rate deposited at the time of entry, over two years before Customs had mistakenly `actually' liquidated the [entries] ... Customs had erred in granting the refund to Shinyei[, and a]s such, the Government is entitled to recover the refund plus interest. Id. at 1222. Shinyei filed a timely appeal from the court's April 20, 2007 judgment. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1295(a)(5).