SlipȱOp.ȱ24Ȭśŗȱ
UNITEDȱSTATESȱCOURTȱOFȱINTERNATIONALȱTRADEȱ
COLUMBIAȱALUMINUMȱPRODUCTS,ȱ LLC,ȱ
Plaintiff,ȱ ȱȱBefore:ȱȱTimothyȱC.ȱStanceu,ȱJudgeȱ v.ȱ ȱȱCourtȱNo.ȱ19Ȭ00185ȱ UNITEDȱSTATES,ȱ
Defendant.ȱ
OPINIONȱ
[Sustainingȱremandȱredeterminationȱinȱlitigationȱcontestingȱanȱagencyȱ determinationȱofȱ“evasion”ȱofȱantidumpingȱdutyȱandȱcountervailingȱdutyȱorders]ȱ
Dated:ȱAprilȱŘŚ,ȱ2024ȱ
JeremyȱW.ȱDutra,ȱSquireȱPattonȱBoggsȱ(US)ȱLLP,ȱofȱWashington,ȱD.C.,ȱforȱ plaintiff.ȱȱWithȱhimȱonȱtheȱsubmissionȱwasȱPeterȱJ.ȱKoenig.ȱ
AlexanderȱJ.ȱVanderweide,ȱSeniorȱTrialȱCounsel,ȱCommercialȱLitigationȱBranch,ȱ CivilȱDivision,ȱU.S.ȱDepartmentȱofȱJustice,ȱofȱNewȱYork,ȱN.Y.,ȱforȱdefendant.ȱȱWithȱhimȱ onȱtheȱsubmissionȱwereȱJustinȱR.ȱMiller,ȱAttorneyȬinȬCharge,ȱandȱAimeeȱLee,ȱAssistantȱ Director,ȱInternationalȱTradeȱFieldȱOffice.ȱȱAlsoȱonȱtheȱsubmissionȱwereȱBrianȱM.ȱ Boynton,ȱPrincipalȱDeputyȱAttorneyȱGeneral,ȱPatriciaȱM.ȱMcCarthy,ȱDirector,ȱ CommercialȱLitigationȱBranch,ȱCivilȱDivision,ȱU.S.ȱDepartmentȱofȱJustice,ȱofȱ Washington,ȱD.C.ȱȱOfȱcounselȱonȱtheȱsubmissionȱwasȱTamariȱJ.ȱLagvilava,ȱAttorney,ȱ OfficeȱofȱChiefȱCounsel,ȱU.S.ȱCustomsȱandȱBorderȱProtection,ȱofȱWashington,ȱD.C.ȱ
Stanceu,ȱJudge:ȱȱPlaintiffȱColumbiaȱAluminumȱProducts,ȱLLCȱ(“Columbia”)ȱ
contestedȱtwoȱrelatedȱdecisionsȱthatȱU.S.ȱCustomsȱandȱBorderȱProtectionȱ(“Customs”ȱorȱ
“CBP”)ȱissuedȱunderȱtheȱEnforceȱandȱProtectȱAct,ȱ19ȱU.S.C.ȱ§ȱ1517ȱ(2018)ȱ(theȱ“EAPA”).ȱȱ CourtȱNo.ȱ19Ȭ00185ȱ Pageȱ2ȱ
Inȱbothȱdecisions,ȱCustomsȱdeterminedȱthatȱdoorȱthresholdsȱColumbiaȱimportedȱfromȱ
Vietnamȱwereȱ“coveredȱmerchandise”ȱthatȱevadedȱanȱantidumpingȱdutyȱ(“AD”)ȱorderȱ
andȱaȱcountervailingȱdutyȱ(“CVD”)ȱorderȱ(theȱ“Orders”)ȱonȱaluminumȱextrusionsȱfromȱ
theȱPeople’sȱRepublicȱofȱChina.ȱ
Inȱaȱredeterminationȱissuedȱearlierȱthisȱyearȱinȱresponseȱtoȱanȱorderȱofȱtheȱcourt,ȱ
CustomsȱconcludedȱthatȱColumbia’sȱimportedȱdoorȱthresholdsȱdidȱnotȱevadeȱtheȱ
Ordersȱandȱinformedȱtheȱcourtȱofȱitsȱintentionȱtoȱdiscontinueȱtheȱ“interimȱmeasures”ȱitȱ
earlierȱimposedȱonȱColumbia’sȱimportsȱofȱdoorȱthresholdsȱfromȱVietnam.ȱȱPlaintiffȱ
advocatesȱthatȱtheȱcourtȱsustainȱCBP’sȱdecisionȱthatȱColumbia’sȱimportsȱdidȱnotȱevadeȱ
theȱOrdersȱbutȱobjectsȱtoȱtheȱredeterminationȱtoȱtheȱextentȱthatȱitȱwouldȱnotȱresultȱinȱ
liquidationȱofȱtheȱaffectedȱimportȱentriesȱpriorȱtoȱaȱfinalȱandȱconclusiveȱcourtȱdecisionȱinȱ
thisȱaction.ȱȱTheȱcourtȱsustainsȱCBP’sȱredetermination.ȱ
I. BACKGROUND
Backgroundȱonȱthisȱlitigationȱisȱsetȱforthȱinȱtheȱcourt’sȱpreviousȱopinionȱandȱ
orderȱandȱisȱsupplementedȱherein.ȱȱColumbiaȱAluminumȱProducts,ȱLLCȱv.ȱUnitedȱStates,ȱ
2024ȱWLȱ257026ȱ(Jan.ȱ16,ȱ2024)ȱ(“ColumbiaȱI”).ȱȱInȱColumbiaȱI,ȱtheȱcourtȱorderedȱCustomsȱ
toȱ“submitȱtoȱtheȱcourtȱaȱRedeterminationȱuponȱRemandȱthatȱisȱconsistentȱwithȱthisȱ
OpinionȱandȱOrderȱandȱaddressesȱtheȱactionsȱitȱwillȱtakeȱwithȱrespectȱtoȱtheȱInterimȱ
Measuresȱitȱpreviouslyȱimposed.”ȱȱId.,ȱ2024ȱWLȱatȱ*13.ȱ CourtȱNo.ȱ19Ȭ00185ȱ Pageȱ3ȱ
BeforeȱtheȱcourtȱisȱCBP’sȱFinalȱ“RemandȱRedetermination”ȱ(Feb.ȱ15,ȱ2024),ȱECFȱ
No.ȱ86ȱ(“RemandȱRedetermination”).ȱȱPlaintiffȱfiledȱcommentsȱonȱtheȱRemandȱ
Redetermination.ȱȱColumbiaȱAluminumȱProducts,ȱLLC’sȱCommentsȱonȱRemandȱ
Redeterminationȱ(Feb.ȱ24,ȱ2024),ȱECFȱNo.ȱ87ȱ(“Columbia’sȱComments”).ȱȱDefendantȱ
respondedȱtoȱthoseȱcomments.ȱȱDef.’sȱResponseȱtoȱPl.’sȱCommentsȱonȱRemandȱ
Redeterminationȱ(Mar.ȱ5,ȱ2024),ȱECFȱNo.ȱ88ȱ(“Def.’sȱResponse”).ȱ
II. DISCUSSION
InȱtheȱRemandȱRedetermination,ȱCustomsȱconcludedȱ“thatȱColumbiaȱcorrectlyȱ
enteredȱmerchandiseȱasȱentryȱtypeȱ“01”ȱconsumptionȱentries,ȱinsteadȱofȱasȱentryȱtypeȱ
“03”ȱAD/CVDȱentriesȱand,ȱaccordingly,ȱnoȱAD/CVDȱdutiesȱareȱapplicable.”ȱȱRemandȱ
Redeterminationȱatȱ6.ȱȱCustomsȱconcluded,ȱfurther,ȱthatȱ“[t]hus,ȱColumbiaȱdidȱnotȱenterȱ
coveredȱmerchandiseȱintoȱtheȱUnitedȱStatesȱthroughȱmaterialȱfalseȱstatementsȱorȱ
omissions.”ȱȱCustomsȱstatedȱthatȱ“[g]ivenȱthisȱreversalȱofȱtheȱMarchȱ2019ȱDeterminationȱ
andȱAdministrativeȱReviewȱ[theȱagencyȱdecisionsȱcontestedȱinȱthisȱlitigation1],ȱCBPȱ
intendsȱtoȱterminateȱtheȱinterimȱmeasuresȱimposedȱonȱMayȱ17,ȱ2018ȱandȱprocessȱ
refundsȱofȱanyȱcashȱdeposits,ȱasȱappropriate,ȱonceȱjudgmentȱisȱenteredȱinȱthisȱmatter.”ȱȱ
1ȱNoticeȱofȱFinalȱDeterminationȱasȱtoȱEvasionȱ(Mar.ȱ20,ȱ2019),ȱP.R.ȱDoc.ȱ61;ȱEnforceȱ andȱProtectȱActȱ(“EAPA”)ȱCaseȱNumberȱ7232ȱ(Aug.ȱ26,ȱ2019),ȱP.R.ȱDoc.ȱ67.ȱȱCitationsȱ hereinȱtoȱdocumentsȱfromȱtheȱJointȱAppendixȱ(Apr.ȱ28,ȱ2023),ȱECFȱNos.ȱ83ȱ(conf.),ȱ82ȱ (public)ȱareȱreferencedȱhereinȱasȱ“P.R.ȱDoc.ȱ__”ȱforȱpublicȱversions.ȱȱAllȱinformationȱ disclosedȱinȱthisȱOpinionȱandȱOrderȱisȱpublicȱinformation.ȱ CourtȱNo.ȱ19Ȭ00185ȱ Pageȱ4ȱ
Id.ȱatȱ6—7.ȱȱCustomsȱaddedȱthatȱ“[a]nyȱunliquidatedȱentriesȱwillȱbeȱliquidatedȱ
consistentȱwithȱtheȱfinalȱandȱconclusiveȱcourtȱdecisionȱinȱthisȱcase,ȱincludingȱallȱ
remandsȱandȱappeals.”ȱȱId.ȱatȱ7.ȱȱTheȱ“interimȱmeasures”ȱtoȱwhichȱCustomsȱreferredȱ
“includedȱ‘rateȬadjusting’ȱtheȱentriesȱ.ȱ.ȱ.ȱforȱtheȱcollectionȱofȱcashȱdeposits,ȱrequiringȱ
‘liveȱentry’ȱforȱ‘allȱfutureȱimportsȱofȱproductsȱbelievedȱtoȱbeȱaluminumȱthresholdsȱbyȱ
Columbia’ȱ.ȱ.ȱ.ȱandȱextendingȱandȱsuspendingȱliquidationȱofȱentries.”ȱȱColumbiaȱI,ȱ2024ȱ
WLȱ257026ȱatȱ*2ȱ(quotingȱNoticeȱofȱInitiationȱofȱInvestigationȱandȱInterimȱMeasuresȱatȱ6—7ȱ
(Mayȱ17,ȱ2018),ȱP.R.ȱDoc.ȱ18).ȱ
Columbiaȱagreesȱinȱpart,ȱandȱdisagreesȱinȱpart,ȱwithȱtheȱRemandȱ
Redetermination.ȱȱColumbiaȱstatesȱthatȱitȱagreesȱwithȱtheȱagency’sȱdecidingȱ“thatȱ
ColumbiaȱdidȱnotȱenterȱcoveredȱmerchandiseȱintoȱtheȱUnitedȱStatesȱbyȱmeansȱofȱ
evasion”ȱandȱ“requestsȱthatȱtheȱCourtȱsustainȱtheȱRemandȱRedeterminationȱofȱnoȱ
evasionȱandȱenterȱjudgmentȱinȱColumbia’sȱfavor.”ȱȱColumbia’sȱCommentsȱ1.ȱȱAtȱtheȱ
sameȱtime,ȱColumbiaȱobjectsȱthatȱ“[h]avingȱmadeȱaȱnegativeȱdetermination,ȱCBPȱstatesȱ
thatȱitȱintendsȱtoȱterminateȱinterimȱmeasuresȱimplementedȱonȱMayȱ17,ȱ2018.”ȱȱId.ȱȱ“Thisȱ
suggestsȱthatȱinterimȱmeasuresȱagainstȱColumbiaȱremainȱinȱplaceȱ.ȱ.ȱ.ȱcontraryȱtoȱCBPȱ
regulations,ȱwhichȱrequireȱimmediateȱterminationȱofȱinterimȱmeasuresȱuponȱaȱnegativeȱ
findingȱofȱevasion.”ȱȱId.ȱatȱ1Ȭ2ȱ(citingȱ19ȱC.F.R.ȱ§ȱ165.27(c)).ȱȱFurther,ȱColumbiaȱobjectsȱtoȱ CourtȱNo.ȱ19Ȭ00185ȱ Pageȱ5ȱ
anyȱdelayȱinȱtheȱliquidationȱofȱunliquidatedȱentriesȱthatȱareȱaffectedȱbyȱthisȱlitigation,ȱ
arguingȱasȱfollows:ȱ
CBPȱfurtherȱindicatesȱthatȱitȱwillȱliquidateȱanyȱunliquidatedȱentriesȱ followingȱaȱfinalȱandȱconclusiveȱcourtȱdecision,ȱincludingȱallȱremandsȱandȱ appeals.ȱȱRespectfully,ȱthereȱwillȱbeȱnoȱappealȱhere.ȱȱColumbiaȱsucceededȱ inȱitsȱchallengeȱtoȱtheȱoriginalȱevasionȱdetermination.ȱȱTheȱUnitedȱStates,ȱ moreover,ȱdidȱnotȱmakeȱitsȱfindingȱofȱnoȱevasionȱunderȱprotest.ȱȱAndȱ Endura,ȱtheȱinstigatorȱofȱthisȱmatter,ȱabandonedȱanyȱparticipationȱatȱtheȱ CourtȱorȱbeforeȱCBP,ȱthusȱwaivingȱanyȱrightȱtoȱappeal.ȱȱButȱforȱtheȱinterimȱ measures,ȱallȱColumbiaȱentriesȱsuspendedȱbyȱCBPȱwouldȱhaveȱliquidatedȱ overȱfourȱyearsȱago.ȱUnderȱtheȱcircumstances,ȱColumbiaȱrequestsȱthatȱtheȱ CourtȱorderȱCBPȱtoȱterminateȱimmediatelyȱinterimȱmeasuresȱandȱliquidateȱ allȱpreviouslyȱsuspendedȱentriesȱuponȱtheȱCourt’sȱentryȱofȱjudgment.ȱ
Id.ȱ
InȱitsȱresponseȱtoȱColumbia’sȱcomments,ȱdefendantȱcontestsȱColumbia’sȱ
assertionȱthatȱ“CBPȱhasȱnotȱabidedȱbyȱitsȱregulations,”ȱpointingȱoutȱthatȱtheȱregulationȱ
onȱwhichȱColumbiaȱrelies,ȱ19ȱC.F.R.ȱ§ȱ165.27(c)ȱ(2023),ȱprovidesȱasȱfollows:ȱ“IfȱCBPȱ
makesȱaȱdeterminationȱunderȱparagraphȱ(a)ȱofȱthisȱsectionȱthatȱcoveredȱmerchandiseȱ
wasȱnotȱenteredȱintoȱtheȱcustomsȱterritoryȱofȱtheȱUnitedȱStatesȱthroughȱevasion,ȱthenȱ
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
SlipȱOp.ȱ24Ȭśŗȱ
UNITEDȱSTATESȱCOURTȱOFȱINTERNATIONALȱTRADEȱ
COLUMBIAȱALUMINUMȱPRODUCTS,ȱ LLC,ȱ
Plaintiff,ȱ ȱȱBefore:ȱȱTimothyȱC.ȱStanceu,ȱJudgeȱ v.ȱ ȱȱCourtȱNo.ȱ19Ȭ00185ȱ UNITEDȱSTATES,ȱ
Defendant.ȱ
OPINIONȱ
[Sustainingȱremandȱredeterminationȱinȱlitigationȱcontestingȱanȱagencyȱ determinationȱofȱ“evasion”ȱofȱantidumpingȱdutyȱandȱcountervailingȱdutyȱorders]ȱ
Dated:ȱAprilȱŘŚ,ȱ2024ȱ
JeremyȱW.ȱDutra,ȱSquireȱPattonȱBoggsȱ(US)ȱLLP,ȱofȱWashington,ȱD.C.,ȱforȱ plaintiff.ȱȱWithȱhimȱonȱtheȱsubmissionȱwasȱPeterȱJ.ȱKoenig.ȱ
AlexanderȱJ.ȱVanderweide,ȱSeniorȱTrialȱCounsel,ȱCommercialȱLitigationȱBranch,ȱ CivilȱDivision,ȱU.S.ȱDepartmentȱofȱJustice,ȱofȱNewȱYork,ȱN.Y.,ȱforȱdefendant.ȱȱWithȱhimȱ onȱtheȱsubmissionȱwereȱJustinȱR.ȱMiller,ȱAttorneyȬinȬCharge,ȱandȱAimeeȱLee,ȱAssistantȱ Director,ȱInternationalȱTradeȱFieldȱOffice.ȱȱAlsoȱonȱtheȱsubmissionȱwereȱBrianȱM.ȱ Boynton,ȱPrincipalȱDeputyȱAttorneyȱGeneral,ȱPatriciaȱM.ȱMcCarthy,ȱDirector,ȱ CommercialȱLitigationȱBranch,ȱCivilȱDivision,ȱU.S.ȱDepartmentȱofȱJustice,ȱofȱ Washington,ȱD.C.ȱȱOfȱcounselȱonȱtheȱsubmissionȱwasȱTamariȱJ.ȱLagvilava,ȱAttorney,ȱ OfficeȱofȱChiefȱCounsel,ȱU.S.ȱCustomsȱandȱBorderȱProtection,ȱofȱWashington,ȱD.C.ȱ
Stanceu,ȱJudge:ȱȱPlaintiffȱColumbiaȱAluminumȱProducts,ȱLLCȱ(“Columbia”)ȱ
contestedȱtwoȱrelatedȱdecisionsȱthatȱU.S.ȱCustomsȱandȱBorderȱProtectionȱ(“Customs”ȱorȱ
“CBP”)ȱissuedȱunderȱtheȱEnforceȱandȱProtectȱAct,ȱ19ȱU.S.C.ȱ§ȱ1517ȱ(2018)ȱ(theȱ“EAPA”).ȱȱ CourtȱNo.ȱ19Ȭ00185ȱ Pageȱ2ȱ
Inȱbothȱdecisions,ȱCustomsȱdeterminedȱthatȱdoorȱthresholdsȱColumbiaȱimportedȱfromȱ
Vietnamȱwereȱ“coveredȱmerchandise”ȱthatȱevadedȱanȱantidumpingȱdutyȱ(“AD”)ȱorderȱ
andȱaȱcountervailingȱdutyȱ(“CVD”)ȱorderȱ(theȱ“Orders”)ȱonȱaluminumȱextrusionsȱfromȱ
theȱPeople’sȱRepublicȱofȱChina.ȱ
Inȱaȱredeterminationȱissuedȱearlierȱthisȱyearȱinȱresponseȱtoȱanȱorderȱofȱtheȱcourt,ȱ
CustomsȱconcludedȱthatȱColumbia’sȱimportedȱdoorȱthresholdsȱdidȱnotȱevadeȱtheȱ
Ordersȱandȱinformedȱtheȱcourtȱofȱitsȱintentionȱtoȱdiscontinueȱtheȱ“interimȱmeasures”ȱitȱ
earlierȱimposedȱonȱColumbia’sȱimportsȱofȱdoorȱthresholdsȱfromȱVietnam.ȱȱPlaintiffȱ
advocatesȱthatȱtheȱcourtȱsustainȱCBP’sȱdecisionȱthatȱColumbia’sȱimportsȱdidȱnotȱevadeȱ
theȱOrdersȱbutȱobjectsȱtoȱtheȱredeterminationȱtoȱtheȱextentȱthatȱitȱwouldȱnotȱresultȱinȱ
liquidationȱofȱtheȱaffectedȱimportȱentriesȱpriorȱtoȱaȱfinalȱandȱconclusiveȱcourtȱdecisionȱinȱ
thisȱaction.ȱȱTheȱcourtȱsustainsȱCBP’sȱredetermination.ȱ
I. BACKGROUND
Backgroundȱonȱthisȱlitigationȱisȱsetȱforthȱinȱtheȱcourt’sȱpreviousȱopinionȱandȱ
orderȱandȱisȱsupplementedȱherein.ȱȱColumbiaȱAluminumȱProducts,ȱLLCȱv.ȱUnitedȱStates,ȱ
2024ȱWLȱ257026ȱ(Jan.ȱ16,ȱ2024)ȱ(“ColumbiaȱI”).ȱȱInȱColumbiaȱI,ȱtheȱcourtȱorderedȱCustomsȱ
toȱ“submitȱtoȱtheȱcourtȱaȱRedeterminationȱuponȱRemandȱthatȱisȱconsistentȱwithȱthisȱ
OpinionȱandȱOrderȱandȱaddressesȱtheȱactionsȱitȱwillȱtakeȱwithȱrespectȱtoȱtheȱInterimȱ
Measuresȱitȱpreviouslyȱimposed.”ȱȱId.,ȱ2024ȱWLȱatȱ*13.ȱ CourtȱNo.ȱ19Ȭ00185ȱ Pageȱ3ȱ
BeforeȱtheȱcourtȱisȱCBP’sȱFinalȱ“RemandȱRedetermination”ȱ(Feb.ȱ15,ȱ2024),ȱECFȱ
No.ȱ86ȱ(“RemandȱRedetermination”).ȱȱPlaintiffȱfiledȱcommentsȱonȱtheȱRemandȱ
Redetermination.ȱȱColumbiaȱAluminumȱProducts,ȱLLC’sȱCommentsȱonȱRemandȱ
Redeterminationȱ(Feb.ȱ24,ȱ2024),ȱECFȱNo.ȱ87ȱ(“Columbia’sȱComments”).ȱȱDefendantȱ
respondedȱtoȱthoseȱcomments.ȱȱDef.’sȱResponseȱtoȱPl.’sȱCommentsȱonȱRemandȱ
Redeterminationȱ(Mar.ȱ5,ȱ2024),ȱECFȱNo.ȱ88ȱ(“Def.’sȱResponse”).ȱ
II. DISCUSSION
InȱtheȱRemandȱRedetermination,ȱCustomsȱconcludedȱ“thatȱColumbiaȱcorrectlyȱ
enteredȱmerchandiseȱasȱentryȱtypeȱ“01”ȱconsumptionȱentries,ȱinsteadȱofȱasȱentryȱtypeȱ
“03”ȱAD/CVDȱentriesȱand,ȱaccordingly,ȱnoȱAD/CVDȱdutiesȱareȱapplicable.”ȱȱRemandȱ
Redeterminationȱatȱ6.ȱȱCustomsȱconcluded,ȱfurther,ȱthatȱ“[t]hus,ȱColumbiaȱdidȱnotȱenterȱ
coveredȱmerchandiseȱintoȱtheȱUnitedȱStatesȱthroughȱmaterialȱfalseȱstatementsȱorȱ
omissions.”ȱȱCustomsȱstatedȱthatȱ“[g]ivenȱthisȱreversalȱofȱtheȱMarchȱ2019ȱDeterminationȱ
andȱAdministrativeȱReviewȱ[theȱagencyȱdecisionsȱcontestedȱinȱthisȱlitigation1],ȱCBPȱ
intendsȱtoȱterminateȱtheȱinterimȱmeasuresȱimposedȱonȱMayȱ17,ȱ2018ȱandȱprocessȱ
refundsȱofȱanyȱcashȱdeposits,ȱasȱappropriate,ȱonceȱjudgmentȱisȱenteredȱinȱthisȱmatter.”ȱȱ
1ȱNoticeȱofȱFinalȱDeterminationȱasȱtoȱEvasionȱ(Mar.ȱ20,ȱ2019),ȱP.R.ȱDoc.ȱ61;ȱEnforceȱ andȱProtectȱActȱ(“EAPA”)ȱCaseȱNumberȱ7232ȱ(Aug.ȱ26,ȱ2019),ȱP.R.ȱDoc.ȱ67.ȱȱCitationsȱ hereinȱtoȱdocumentsȱfromȱtheȱJointȱAppendixȱ(Apr.ȱ28,ȱ2023),ȱECFȱNos.ȱ83ȱ(conf.),ȱ82ȱ (public)ȱareȱreferencedȱhereinȱasȱ“P.R.ȱDoc.ȱ__”ȱforȱpublicȱversions.ȱȱAllȱinformationȱ disclosedȱinȱthisȱOpinionȱandȱOrderȱisȱpublicȱinformation.ȱ CourtȱNo.ȱ19Ȭ00185ȱ Pageȱ4ȱ
Id.ȱatȱ6—7.ȱȱCustomsȱaddedȱthatȱ“[a]nyȱunliquidatedȱentriesȱwillȱbeȱliquidatedȱ
consistentȱwithȱtheȱfinalȱandȱconclusiveȱcourtȱdecisionȱinȱthisȱcase,ȱincludingȱallȱ
remandsȱandȱappeals.”ȱȱId.ȱatȱ7.ȱȱTheȱ“interimȱmeasures”ȱtoȱwhichȱCustomsȱreferredȱ
“includedȱ‘rateȬadjusting’ȱtheȱentriesȱ.ȱ.ȱ.ȱforȱtheȱcollectionȱofȱcashȱdeposits,ȱrequiringȱ
‘liveȱentry’ȱforȱ‘allȱfutureȱimportsȱofȱproductsȱbelievedȱtoȱbeȱaluminumȱthresholdsȱbyȱ
Columbia’ȱ.ȱ.ȱ.ȱandȱextendingȱandȱsuspendingȱliquidationȱofȱentries.”ȱȱColumbiaȱI,ȱ2024ȱ
WLȱ257026ȱatȱ*2ȱ(quotingȱNoticeȱofȱInitiationȱofȱInvestigationȱandȱInterimȱMeasuresȱatȱ6—7ȱ
(Mayȱ17,ȱ2018),ȱP.R.ȱDoc.ȱ18).ȱ
Columbiaȱagreesȱinȱpart,ȱandȱdisagreesȱinȱpart,ȱwithȱtheȱRemandȱ
Redetermination.ȱȱColumbiaȱstatesȱthatȱitȱagreesȱwithȱtheȱagency’sȱdecidingȱ“thatȱ
ColumbiaȱdidȱnotȱenterȱcoveredȱmerchandiseȱintoȱtheȱUnitedȱStatesȱbyȱmeansȱofȱ
evasion”ȱandȱ“requestsȱthatȱtheȱCourtȱsustainȱtheȱRemandȱRedeterminationȱofȱnoȱ
evasionȱandȱenterȱjudgmentȱinȱColumbia’sȱfavor.”ȱȱColumbia’sȱCommentsȱ1.ȱȱAtȱtheȱ
sameȱtime,ȱColumbiaȱobjectsȱthatȱ“[h]avingȱmadeȱaȱnegativeȱdetermination,ȱCBPȱstatesȱ
thatȱitȱintendsȱtoȱterminateȱinterimȱmeasuresȱimplementedȱonȱMayȱ17,ȱ2018.”ȱȱId.ȱȱ“Thisȱ
suggestsȱthatȱinterimȱmeasuresȱagainstȱColumbiaȱremainȱinȱplaceȱ.ȱ.ȱ.ȱcontraryȱtoȱCBPȱ
regulations,ȱwhichȱrequireȱimmediateȱterminationȱofȱinterimȱmeasuresȱuponȱaȱnegativeȱ
findingȱofȱevasion.”ȱȱId.ȱatȱ1Ȭ2ȱ(citingȱ19ȱC.F.R.ȱ§ȱ165.27(c)).ȱȱFurther,ȱColumbiaȱobjectsȱtoȱ CourtȱNo.ȱ19Ȭ00185ȱ Pageȱ5ȱ
anyȱdelayȱinȱtheȱliquidationȱofȱunliquidatedȱentriesȱthatȱareȱaffectedȱbyȱthisȱlitigation,ȱ
arguingȱasȱfollows:ȱ
CBPȱfurtherȱindicatesȱthatȱitȱwillȱliquidateȱanyȱunliquidatedȱentriesȱ followingȱaȱfinalȱandȱconclusiveȱcourtȱdecision,ȱincludingȱallȱremandsȱandȱ appeals.ȱȱRespectfully,ȱthereȱwillȱbeȱnoȱappealȱhere.ȱȱColumbiaȱsucceededȱ inȱitsȱchallengeȱtoȱtheȱoriginalȱevasionȱdetermination.ȱȱTheȱUnitedȱStates,ȱ moreover,ȱdidȱnotȱmakeȱitsȱfindingȱofȱnoȱevasionȱunderȱprotest.ȱȱAndȱ Endura,ȱtheȱinstigatorȱofȱthisȱmatter,ȱabandonedȱanyȱparticipationȱatȱtheȱ CourtȱorȱbeforeȱCBP,ȱthusȱwaivingȱanyȱrightȱtoȱappeal.ȱȱButȱforȱtheȱinterimȱ measures,ȱallȱColumbiaȱentriesȱsuspendedȱbyȱCBPȱwouldȱhaveȱliquidatedȱ overȱfourȱyearsȱago.ȱUnderȱtheȱcircumstances,ȱColumbiaȱrequestsȱthatȱtheȱ CourtȱorderȱCBPȱtoȱterminateȱimmediatelyȱinterimȱmeasuresȱandȱliquidateȱ allȱpreviouslyȱsuspendedȱentriesȱuponȱtheȱCourt’sȱentryȱofȱjudgment.ȱ
Id.ȱ
InȱitsȱresponseȱtoȱColumbia’sȱcomments,ȱdefendantȱcontestsȱColumbia’sȱ
assertionȱthatȱ“CBPȱhasȱnotȱabidedȱbyȱitsȱregulations,”ȱpointingȱoutȱthatȱtheȱregulationȱ
onȱwhichȱColumbiaȱrelies,ȱ19ȱC.F.R.ȱ§ȱ165.27(c)ȱ(2023),ȱprovidesȱasȱfollows:ȱ“IfȱCBPȱ
makesȱaȱdeterminationȱunderȱparagraphȱ(a)ȱofȱthisȱsectionȱthatȱcoveredȱmerchandiseȱ
wasȱnotȱenteredȱintoȱtheȱcustomsȱterritoryȱofȱtheȱUnitedȱStatesȱthroughȱevasion,ȱthenȱ
CBPȱwillȱceaseȱapplyingȱanyȱinterimȱmeasuresȱtakenȱunderȱ§ȱ165.24ȱandȱliquidateȱtheȱ
entriesȱinȱtheȱnormalȱcourse.’”ȱȱDef.’sȱResponseȱ5ȱ(quotingȱ19ȱC.F.R.ȱ§ȱ165.27(c)).ȱ
Columbia’sȱobjectionȱthatȱ19ȱC.F.R.ȱ§ȱ165.27(c)ȱrequiredȱCustomsȱtoȱterminateȱtheȱ
interimȱmeasuresȱimmediatelyȱuponȱaȱnegativeȱfindingȱofȱevasion,ȱi.e.,ȱuponȱCBP’sȱ
issuingȱtheȱRemandȱRedetermination,ȱisȱnotȱpersuasive.ȱȱTheȱRemandȱRedetermination,ȱ CourtȱNo.ȱ19Ȭ00185ȱ Pageȱ6ȱ
whichȱwasȱsubmittedȱinȱresponseȱtoȱcourtȱorder,ȱisȱsubmittedȱforȱtheȱcourt’sȱreviewȱandȱ
isȱnotȱinȱeffectȱpriorȱtoȱtheȱcourt’sȱsustainingȱitȱthroughȱtheȱentryȱofȱjudgment.ȱȱInȱ
accordanceȱwithȱtheȱRemandȱRedetermination,ȱtheȱcourtȱwillȱorderȱCustomsȱtoȱ
terminateȱimmediatelyȱallȱinterimȱmeasuresȱitȱimposedȱinȱtheȱEAPAȱinvestigation.ȱȱToȱ
effectuateȱtheȱRemandȱRedetermination,ȱtheȱcourtȱalsoȱwillȱdirectȱthatȱCustomsȱnotȱ
requireȱtheȱfilingȱofȱentryȱtypeȱ“03”ȱentriesȱonȱfutureȱimportsȱofȱdoorȱthresholdsȱfromȱ
VietnamȱthatȱareȱofȱaȱclassȱorȱkindȱthatȱwouldȱhaveȱbeenȱsubjectȱtoȱtheȱEAPAȱ
investigationȱandȱnotȱrequireȱtheȱdepositȱofȱantidumpingȱorȱcountervailingȱdutiesȱonȱ
theseȱfutureȱentries.ȱ
Withȱrespectȱtoȱallȱentriesȱaffectedȱbyȱthisȱlitigationȱthatȱwereȱmadeȱpriorȱtoȱtheȱ
entryȱofȱjudgment,ȱColumbiaȱisȱentitled,ȱuponȱtheȱentryȱofȱjudgment,ȱtoȱreceiveȱaȱ
promptȱrefundȱofȱallȱestimatedȱantidumpingȱorȱcountervailingȱdutiesȱthatȱwereȱ
deposited,ȱwithȱinterestȱasȱprovidedȱbyȱlaw.ȱȱButȱColumbiaȱhasȱnotȱmadeȱtheȱcaseȱforȱ
theȱcourt’sȱorderingȱimmediateȱliquidationȱofȱtheȱentriesȱaffectedȱbyȱthisȱlitigation.ȱ
ColumbiaȱcorrectlyȱpointsȱoutȱthatȱCustomsȱdidȱnotȱreachȱitsȱnegativeȱ
determinationȱofȱevasionȱ“underȱprotest.”ȱȱColumbia’sȱCommentsȱ2.ȱȱAlso,ȱdefendantȱ
statesȱthatȱ“weȱenvisionȱthatȱnoȱappealȱwillȱbeȱtakenȱhere.”ȱȱDef.’sȱResponseȱ5.ȱȱ
Nevertheless,ȱtheȱcourtȱisȱnotȱconvincedȱthatȱitȱshouldȱorderȱimmediateȱliquidationȱofȱ
theȱaffectedȱentries,ȱaȱremedyȱprovidedȱforȱneitherȱinȱtheȱEAPAȱnorȱinȱ19ȱC.F.R.ȱ CourtȱNo.ȱ19Ȭ00185ȱ Pageȱ7ȱ
§ 165.27(c).ȱȱMoreover,ȱwhetherȱtheȱgovernment’sȱissuingȱtheȱnegativeȱEAPA
determinationȱabsentȱaȱprotestȱwillȱprecludeȱtheȱgovernment’sȱsuccessfulȱappealȱofȱaȱ
judgmentȱinȱthisȱactionȱisȱaȱquestionȱforȱtheȱCourtȱofȱAppealsȱforȱtheȱFederalȱCircuitȱ
(“CourtȱofȱAppeals”),ȱnotȱthisȱCourt,ȱtoȱdecide.ȱȱAdditionally,ȱwhetherȱliquidationȱofȱtheȱ
entriesȱaffectedȱbyȱthisȱlitigationȱeffectivelyȱwouldȱmootȱanyȱappealȱbyȱtheȱgovernmentȱ
ofȱaȱjudgmentȱinȱthisȱactionȱisȱanȱunsettledȱquestion.ȱȱDefendantȱhasȱnotȱruledȱoutȱtheȱ
possibilityȱthatȱitȱwillȱappeal,ȱandȱtheȱcourtȱwillȱavoidȱtakingȱanȱactionȱthatȱcouldȱmootȱ
anyȱappealȱofȱthisȱCourt’sȱjudgmentȱthatȱtheȱgovernmentȱmightȱpursue.ȱ
Finally,ȱColumbiaȱhasȱnotȱshownȱitȱwillȱbeȱprejudicedȱbyȱaȱdelayȱinȱtheȱ
liquidationȱofȱtheȱaffectedȱentriesȱpendingȱaȱfinalȱandȱconclusiveȱjudgmentȱinȱthisȱ
action.ȱȱColumbiaȱisȱawardedȱallȱtheȱreliefȱonȱitsȱfutureȱentriesȱthatȱthisȱcourtȱmayȱgrantȱ
andȱwillȱreceiveȱanȱadequateȱremedyȱasȱtoȱpastȱentriesȱprovidedȱitȱpromptlyȱreceivesȱaȱ
refundȱofȱallȱestimatedȱantidumpingȱandȱcountervailingȱdutiesȱthatȱwereȱdepositedȱonȱ
theseȱentries,ȱwithȱinterestȱasȱprovidedȱbyȱlaw.ȱ
ToȱensureȱthatȱColumbiaȱreceivesȱanȱadequateȱremedyȱevenȱshouldȱliquidationȱ
beȱdelayedȱpendingȱappeal,ȱtheȱcourtȱwillȱorderȱthatȱCustomsȱnotȱliquidateȱwithȱtheȱ
assessmentȱofȱantidumpingȱorȱcountervailingȱdutiesȱanyȱentriesȱofȱmerchandiseȱthatȱisȱ
ofȱtheȱsameȱclassȱorȱkindȱasȱtheȱmerchandiseȱthatȱwasȱtheȱsubjectȱofȱtheȱEAPAȱ
investigationȱpriorȱtoȱaȱfinalȱandȱconclusiveȱjudgmentȱinȱthisȱlitigation.ȱȱTheȱcourtȱwillȱ