H302509

HQ H302509 April 18, 2024 OT:RR:CTF:EPDR H302509 LNF CATEGORY: ENTRY Center Director Consumer Products and Mass Merchandising 1699 Phoenix Parkway, Suite 400 College Park, GA 30349 Attn.: Mary Alice Gustafson, Supervisory Import Specialist RE: Protest No. 4601-18-100646; Reliquidation; Wooden Bedroom Furniture Dear Center Director, This letter is in response to the application for further review of protest no. 4601-18-100646, filed by Hospitality Purchasing Group International, LLC (“HPG” or “Protestant”) on April 25, 2018. HPG contests the timeliness of reliquidation on three entries of wooden bedroom furniture (“WBF”) from the People’s Republic of China (“PRC” or “China”), the assessment of antidumping duties at the China-wide rate, and the assessment of interest for underpayment of duties. FACTS: HPG made three entries of WBF from China in March and April 2014, all of which were exported by Shanghai Jian Pu Import & Export Co. Ltd., (“Shanghai Jian Pu”). These entries were subject to an antidumping duty order on WBF from China. See Notice of Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Order: Wooden Bedroom Furniture From the People’s Republic of China, 70 Fed. Reg. 329 (Dep’t of Commerce Jan. 4, 2005) (“AD Order”) (Case No. A-570-890-122). In its administrative review for entries occurring in 2014, the U.S. Department of Commerce (“Commerce”) determined that Shanghai Jian Pu failed to establish its eligibility for separate rate status, and therefore applied the China-wide rate of 216.01 percent to the company’s exports. See Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People’s Republic of China: Final Results and Final Determination of No Shipments, In Part: 2014 Administrative Review, 81 Fed Reg. 21,319 (Dep’t of Commerce Apr. 11, 2016). This determination was challenged before the U.S. Court of International Trade (“CIT”) and liquidation of the relevant entries was enjoined pending adjudication. See Am. Furniture Mfrs. Comm. for Legal Trade v. United States, Ct. No. 16-00070 (Ct. Int’l Trade Mar. 13, 2017). On May 2, 2016, Commerce issued Message 6123302, which stated in pertinent part: 1. On 04/27/2016, the U.S. Court of International Trade issued a preliminary injunction (PI) enjoining liquidation of entries identified in paragraph 2 which are subject to the antidumping duty order on wooden bedroom furniture from the PRC (A-570-890) for the period 01/01/2014 through 12/31/2014. This PI was issued in connection with court number 16-00070. 2. This PI enjoins liquidation of entries of wooden bedroom furniture from the PRC that: 1) were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption during the period January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014, inclusive; (2) are subject to the antidumping administrative review, the final results of which were published as Wooden Bedroom Furniture From the People’s Republic of China: Final Results and Final Determination of No Shipments, In Part: 2014 Administrative Review, 81 Fed. Reg. 21319 (Dep’t of Commerce April 11 2016); (3) were exported from the PRC to the United States by Shanghai Jian Pu Import & Export Co., Ltd.; and (4) remain unliquidated as of 5 p.m. on 04/27/2016. 3. Effective 04/27/2016 (the date the Court issued the PI), no liquidation may be made for entries referred to in paragraph 2 which remain unliquidated as of 5 p.m. on 04/27/2016. Any such entries that are set for liquidation must be unset immediately. Continue to suspend liquidation of these entries until liquidation instructions are issued. The CIT dismissed the lawsuit on March 13, 2017. On May 12, 2017, the dismissal of the litigation became final and the injunction was legally dissolved. On May 30, 2017, Commerce issued Message 7150306, which stated in pertinent part: 1. On 03/13/2017, the U.S. Court of International Trade issued a final decision in the case of American Furniture Manufacturers Committee for Legal Trade and Vaughan-Bassett Furniture Company, Inc. v. United States (16-00070). As a result of this decision, the injunction to which message 6123302 refers enjoining liquidation of entries which are subject to the antidumping duty order on wooden bedroom furniture from the Peoples Republic of China for the period 01/01/2014 through 12/31/2014 exported by Shanghai Jian Pu Import & Export Co., Ltd. dissolved on 05/12/2017. 2. For all shipments of wooden bedroom furniture from the People’s Republic of China exported by Shanghai Jian Pu Import & Export Co., Ltd. (A-570-890-122) and entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption during the period 01/01/2014 through 12/31/2014, assess an antidumping liability equal to the percentage listed below of the entered value: Final rate: 216.01%. 3. These instructions constitute notice of the lifting of suspension of liquidation of entries of subject merchandise covered by paragraph 2. Accordingly, notice of the lifting of suspension occurred on the message date of these instructions. Unless instructed otherwise, for all other shipments of wooden bedroom furniture from the People’s Republic of China you shall continue to collect cash deposits of estimated antidumping duties for the merchandise at the current rates. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) determined that the three entries deemed liquidated on February 16, 2018. On February 28, 2018, CBP reliquidated the three entries at the China-wide rate and assessed interest on underpayment of estimated antidumping duties. On April 25, 2018, HPG filed the protest on the basis that CBP’s reliquidation of the three entries on February 28, 2018 was untimely. HPG asserts that, per Message 7150306, the injunction on the liquidation for the protested entries dissolved on May 12, 2017, and therefore, the entries deemed liquidated on November 12, 2017, six months after the dissolution of the injunction. On this basis, HPG claims that the 90-day deadline for reliquidation was February 10, 2018. HPG further contends that at reliquidation, the entries were not subject to the AD Order “due to the construction of the” furniture, and therefore, interest for underpayment of duties was wrongly assessed. ISSUES: Whether the protested entries were reliquidated timely on February 28, 2018. Whether, at reliquidation, CBP properly determined the entries were subject to the AD Order. LAW AND ANALYSIS: As an initial matter, we find that this protest meets the criteria for further review. Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1514(a)(2), a protestable issue was raised by claiming that CBP erred as to the “amount of duties chargeable” upon liquidation of the entry at issue. We also note that the protest was filed timely. Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1514(c)(3)(A), a party must file a protest within 180 days of the date of liquidation or reliquidation. CBP reliquidated the entries on February 28, 2018. HPG filed this protest on April 25, 2018, which is within the 180-day deadline. Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1504, entries not liquidated within one year of the date of entry will be deemed liquidated “unless suspended as required by statute or court order.” 19 U.S.C. § 1504(a)(1). Once suspension of an entry is removed, either by court order or instructions from Commerce, the entry is deemed liquidated if CBP fails to liquidate “within 6 months after receiving notice of the removal.” Id. at § 1504(d). CBP may voluntarily reliquidate entries that have been liquidated or deemed liquidated within 90 days from the date of the original liquidation or deemed liquidation. See 19 U.S.C. § 1501. Here, liquidation of the protested entries was enjoined by the CIT. See Commerce Message 6123302 (May 2, 2016). On March 13, 2017, the CIT dismissed the case for a lack of subject matter jurisdiction. On May 13, 2017, the dismissal became final and the injunction was legally dissolved. See Commerce Message 7150306 (May 30, 2017). On May 30, 2017, Commerce notified CBP of the dissolution of the injunction. See id. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

As an initial matter, we find that this protest meets the criteria for further review. Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1514(a)(2), a protestable issue was raised by claiming that CBP erred as to the “amount of duties chargeable” upon liquidation of the entry at issue.We also note that the protest was filed timely. Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1514(c)(3)(A), a party must file a protest within 180 days of the date of liquidation or reliquidation. CBP reliquidated the entries on February 28, 2018. HPG filed this protest on April 25, 2018, which is within the 180-day deadline.Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1504, entries not liquidated within one year of the date of entry will be deemed liquidated “unless suspended as required by statute or court order.” 19 U.S.C. § 1504(a)(1). Once suspension of an entry is removed, either by court order or instructions from Commerce, the entry is deemed liquidated if CBP fails to liquidate “within 6 months after receiving notice of the removal.” Id. at § 1504(d). CBP may voluntarily reliquidate entries that have been liquidated or deemed liquidated within 90 days from the date of the original liquidation or deemed liquidation. See 19 U.S.C. § 1501.Here, liquidation of the protested entries was enjoined by the CIT. See Commerce Message 6123302 (May 2, 2016). On March 13, 2017, the CIT dismissed the case for a lack of subject matter jurisdiction. On May 13, 2017, the dismissal became final and the injunction was legally dissolved. See Commerce Message 7150306 (May 30, 2017). On May 30, 2017, Commerce notified CBP of the dissolution of the injunction. See id.The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) has “interpreted 19 U.S.C. § 1504 to require that a notice of removal of suspension of liquidation be ‘unambiguous and public.’” Aspects Furniture Int’l, Inc. v. United States, 42 F.4th 1366, 1370 (Fed. Cir. 2022) (quoting Cemex, S.A. v. United States, 384 F.3d 1314, 1320 (Fed. Cir. 2004)). In Aspects, which involved the same AD Order, period of