Expansion of Lacey Act Import Declaration Requirement - Grunfeld, Desiderio, Lebowitz, Silverman & Klestadt LLP
Under the U.S. Lacey Act, the import of certain products made of, or incorporating, plant/wood material are required to be declared to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). For articles incorporating plant/wood material, the HTSUS classification of the imported finished article determines whether a declaration is required. Effective December 1, 2024, APHIS will expand this list to include an additional 200 + HTSUS Headings/Subheadings. Click HERE for the list.
Where a declaration is required, the following plant/wood information must be provided to APHIS at entry:
a) the scientific name (genus and species);
b) the species country of origin; and
c) the quantity.
Information requirements differ for composite wood articles. Additionally, packaging materials are exempt as are de minimis quantities.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact: John A. Schoenig or call at 212-557-4000.
________________________________________________________________________________
Federal Register Notices:
• Application for Duty Free Entry of Scientific Instruments: The Regents of the University of Michigan, et al.; Notice of Decision on Application for Duty-Free Entry of Scientific Instruments
• Investigations; Determinations, Modifications, and Rulings, etc.: Certain Integrated Circuits, Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same; Notice of Commission Determination To Review in Part a Final Initial Determination; Request for Written Submissions on the Issues Under Review, Remedy, Bond, and the Public Interest
• Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews: Fresh Garlic From the People's Republic of China: Affirmative Final Determination of Circumvention of the Antidumping Duty Order
• Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2021
• Lightweight Thermal Paper From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2022-2023
• Investigations; Determinations, Modifications, and Rulings, etc.: Certain Botulinum Toxin Products and Processes for Manufacturing or Relating to Same; Notice of Request for Submissions on the Public Interest
• Certain Products Containing Tirzepatide and Products Purporting To Contain Tirzepatide; Notice of a Commission Determination Not To Review an Initial Determination Granting a Motion To Amend the Complaint and Notice of Investigation
• Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Investigations, Orders, or Reviews: Notice of Extension of the Deadline for Determining the Adequacy of the Antidumping Duty Petition: Large Top Mount Combination Refrigerator-Freezers From Thailand
• Certain Corrosion Inhibitors From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2022
• Alloy and Certain Carbon Steel Threaded Rod From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2022-2023
________________________________________________________________________________
CBP Seized 1,500 Toys That Violated Federal Safety Requirements - U.S. Customs & Border Protection
Some of the toys posed a laceration hazard and others contained toxic material
CHAMPLAIN, N.Y. – U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers at the Champlain Port of Entry seized a commercial shipment of children’s toys that violated federal safety requirements.
At the end of February, CBP officers examined a shipment of children’s toys that were manufactured in China. Working in collaboration with the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) samples were provided for further testing. CPSC determined that some of the items created sharp points from a routine drop test, which can pose a laceration hazard to children. Other items were found to contain a toxic material that could cause adverse health effects if ingested. In total, nearly 1,500 toys were seized.
“Our CBP officers and Import Specialists continue to do a great job intercepting safety risks before they are able to reach the consumer,” said Champlain Port Director Steven Bronson. “Working alongside CPSC we are able to prevent items like these from potentially causing serious health issues.”
Cooperative enforcement efforts prevent harmful and dangerous products from entering the country. Consumers should visit SaferProducts.gov or call CPSC’s toll-free hotline at (800) 638-2772 to report dangerous products or to learn about product recall information.
CBP has also established an educational initiative to raise consumer awareness about the consequences and dangers associated with the purchase of counterfeit and pirated goods. Information about the Truth Behind Counterfeits public awareness campaign can be found at:
https://cbp.gov/trade/fakegoodsrealdangers
Consumers can take simple steps to protect themselves and their families from counterfeit goods:
• Purchase goods directly from the trademark holder or from authorized retailers.
• When shopping online, read seller reviews and check for a working U.S. phone number and an address that can be used to contact the seller.
________________________________________________________________________________
FTC Submits Comment Supporting Proposed USPTO Rule - Federal Trade Commission
Proposed rule would enable greater antitrust oversight over patent settlement agreements, including pharmaceutical drug settlements
The Federal Trade Commission today submitted a comment supporting a proposed U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) rule involving the disclosure of patent settlement agreements.
In April, the USPTO published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on a variety of proposed changes to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) proceedings. One of the proposed rule changes, which the FTC supports in its comment, would require parties to file with the USPTO all pre-institution patent settlement agreements, including collateral agreements. Pre-institution agreements occur prior to the PTAB’s decision on whether to institute trial.
As the FTC’s comment states, the proposed rule, if adopted, would enhance both the FTC and Department of Justice’s ability to monitor and curb potentially anticompetitive settlement agreements. Currently, parties are only required to disclose settlement agreements if their dispute settles after a PTAB trial proceeding has been initiated.
According to the comment, by requiring the disclosure of any settlement regardless of timing, the proposed rule change would support the FTC’s ability to identify and investigate potentially unlawful settlements in the pharmaceutical sector and across other industries. USPTO’s proposed rule would apply to a broader set of patent settlement agreements related to pharmaceuticals as well as those in other industries, which benefits the FTC’s ability to enforce antitrust laws and prevent unfair methods of competition. For example, the broader disclosure requirements in the proposed rule would help the FTC detect reverse payment settlements between pharmaceutical companies that raise antitrust concerns by preventing competition from lower-cost generic drugs and keeping drug prices high.
The Commission voted 5-0 to submit the comment to USPTO.
The FTC’s comment to the USPTO is the Commission’s latest effort to promote competition involving pharmaceutical drug patents. In April, the FTC expanded its campaign against pharmaceutical manufacturers’ improper or inaccurate listing of patents in the Food and Drug Administration’s Orange Book, disputing junk patent listings for diabetes, weight loss, asthma, and COPD drugs, including Novo Nordisk Inc.’s blockbuster weight-loss drug, Ozempic. The FTC in February submitted a comment to the National Institute of Standards and Technology in support of the use of “march-in” rights as an important check on companies charging Americans inflated prices for drugs developed with taxpayer-funded research. In March, the FTC filed an amicus brief in an asthma inhaler patent dispute which was extensively cited in a district court decision ordering Teva to delist five patent listings.
________________________________________________________________________________
FTC Takes Action Against Adobe and Executives for Hiding Fees, Preventing Consumers from Easily Cancelling Software Subscriptions - Federal Trade Commission
Complaint charges that maker of Photoshop and Acrobat deceived consumers about early termination fees, inhibited cancellations
The Federal Trade Commission is taking action against software maker Adobe and two of its executives, Maninder Sawhney and David Wadhwani, for deceiving consumers by hiding the early termination fee for its most popular subscription plan and making it difficult for consumers to cancel their subscriptions.
A federal court complaint filed by the Department of Justice upon notification and referral from the FTC charges that Adobe pushed consumers toward the “annual paid monthly” subscription without adequately disclosing that cancelling the plan in the first year could cost hundreds of dollars. Wadhwani is the president of Adobe’s digital media business, and Sawhney is an Adobe vice president.
“Adobe trapped customers into year-long subscriptions through hidden early termination fees and numerous cancellation hurdles,” said Samuel Levine, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “Americans are tired of companies hiding the ball during subscription signup and then putting up roadblocks when they try to cancel. The FTC will continue working to protect Americans from these illegal business practices.”
After 2012, Adobe shifted principally to a subscription model, requiring consumers to pay for access to the company’s popular software on a recurring basis. Subscriptions account for most of the company’s revenue.
According to the complaint, when consumers purchase a subscription through the company’s website, Adobe pushes consumers to its “annual paid monthly” subscription plan, pre-selecting it as a default. Adobe prominently shows the plan’s “monthly” cost during enrollment, but it buries the early termination fee (ETF) and its amount, which is 50 percent of the remaining monthly payments when a consumer cancels in their first year. Adobe’s ETF disclosures are buried on the company’s website in small print or require consumers to hover over small icons to find the disclosures.
Consumers complain to the FTC and the Better Business Bureau about the ETF, according to the complaint. These consumers report they were not aware of the existence of the ETF or that the “annual paid monthly” plan required their subscription to continue for a year. The complaint notes that Adobe has been aware of consumers’ confusion about the ETF.
Despite being aware of consumers’ problems with the ETF, the company continues its practice of steering consumers to the annual paid monthly plan while obscuring the ETF, according to the complaint.
In addition to failing to disclose the ETF to consumers when they subscribe, the complaint also alleges that Adobe uses the ETF to ambush consumers to deter them from cancelling their subscriptions. The complaint also alleges that Adobe’s cancellation processes are designed to make cancellation difficult for consumers. When consumers have attempted to cancel their subscription on the company’s website, they have been forced to navigate numerous pages in order to cancel.
When consumers reach out to Adobe’s customer service to cancel, they encounter resistance and delay from Adobe representatives. Consumers also experience other obstacles, such as dropped calls and chats, and multiple transfers. Some consumers who thought they had successfully cancelled their subscription reported that the company continued to charge them until discovering the charges on their credit card statements.
The complaint charges that Adobe’s practices violate the Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act.
The Commission vote to refer the civil penalty complaint to the DOJ for filing was 3-0. The Department of Justice filed the complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
NOTE: The Commission refers a complaint for civil penalties to the DOJ for filing when it has “reason to believe” that the named defendants are violating or are about to violate the law and that a proceeding is in the public interest. The case will be decided by the court.
The staff attorneys on this matter are Sana Chaudhry and Daniel Wilkes of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection.
The Federal Trade Commission works to promote competition and protect and educate consumers. The FTC will never demand money, make threats, tell you to transfer money, or promise you a prize. Learn more about consumer topics at consumer.ftc.gov, or report fraud, scams, and bad business practices at ReportFraud.ftc.gov. Follow the FTC on social media, read consumer alerts and the business blog, and sign up to get the latest FTC news and alerts.
________________________________________________________________________________
FMC Investigating Possible Failure to Comply with Chassis Provisioning Order - Federal Maritime Commission
The Federal Maritime Commission opened an investigation today to determine if the Ocean Carrier Equipment Management Association (OCEMA) and its members are complying with a decision issued earlier this year establishing the right of shipper and trucker choice in chassis provisioning for merchant haulage in four key U.S. markets.
The Commission initiated the non-adjudicatory investigation in response to reports that chassis providers in Los Angeles/Long Beach, Chicago, Memphis, and Savannah are not complying with a cease-and-desist order issued by the Commission on February 13, 2024, in Intermodal Motor Carriers Conference, American Trucking Associations, Inc. v. Ocean Carrier Equipment Management Association Inc, et. al (Docket No. 20-14).
The investigation will be conducted by the Commission’s Bureau of Enforcement, Investigations, and Compliance (BEIC) and will examine whether OCEMA and its members have altered their policies and practices as required by the cease-and-desist order. Non-adjudicatory investigations provide BEIC with subpoena powers as a discovery tool. Evidence of wrongdoing uncovered by BEIC may be used by the Commission to seek an injunction in federal district court. BEIC can also use any evidence of wrongdoing to initiate its own enforcement action and seek civil penalties for non-compliance with a Commission order.
Individuals with information beneficial to BEIC’s investigation, or with information of any wrongdoing by a regulated entity, are encouraged to come forward and share that information with the Commission. Please send any information to BEIC@fmc.gov or call 202-523-5783.
Retaliation against a party for making a complaint at the Commission is a separate offense of the law that carries significant penalties. The Commission will pursue any allegation of retaliatory conduct and hold offending parties fully accountable.
________________________________________________________________________________
CPSC Warns Consumers to Immediately Stop Using Smoke and Carbon Monoxide Detectors Manufactured by Shenzhen Lidingfeng Tech.; Detectors Fail to Alert Consumers to Smoke in a Fire - Consumer Product Safety Commission
Washington, D.C. -- The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) is warning consumers about the risk of serious injury or death associated with defective smoke and carbon monoxide detectors manufactured by Shenzhen Lidingfeng Tech. and sold under multiple brand names, including PetUlove, ORIKLON, SENCKIT, Kingebai, Gaoducash, LDASEC, and AMS. The defective detectors have model number JSN-JY-909COM. Consumers should immediately dispose of these products and install new detectors.
The detectors can fail to alert consumers to the presence of smoke. Smoke sensitivity testing by CPSC found that they fail UL 217, the voluntary safety standard for smoke alarms, and may not alert consumers in the event of a house fire.
In typical residential fire scenarios, there may be as little as three minutes to escape after a smoke alarm sounds before the conditions in the home become incapacitating or deadly. An estimated 2,440 people in the United States die every year from residential structure fires. Furthermore, the risk of dying in a fire is twice as high in homes without a working smoke alarm, as compared to homes with smoke alarms.
Shenzhen Lidingfeng Tech. Co., Ltd., of China has been unresponsive to CPSC’s request to recall the products.
The combination detectors are made of white plastic and measure about 4 x 1.5 x 4 inches, featuring a digital display. “CO & Smoke Alarm,” the model number, and “Shenzhen Lidingfeng Technology Co Ltd” are printed on a white sticker on the detectors. The combination detectors are advertised to detect dangerous levels of carbon monoxide and smoke, and alert with a flashing red LED and a loud alarm pattern. Model No. JSN-JY-909COM was sold under the Amazon ASINs B09B9WLQGZ, B0B9XZSZS8, B0BLMWFT1N, B09WK3KVPH, B09WK3ZQYG, and B0CGZK53VP on Amazon.com for between $17 and $30. The combination detectors were also sold online at Snapklik.com, Desert CRT U.S., TVCMall.com, Kmart, Sears, Mega-DiscountStore.com, AliExpress, Alibaba, eBay, ATO.com, and Chimiya.com.
CPSC urges consumers not to purchase or sell these combination smoke and CO detectors. Stop using them, dispose of them in the trash after removing batteries, and install new smoke detectors.
Report a dangerous product or a product-related injury on www.SaferProducts.gov.
Note: Consumers should install combination smoke and CO detectors on each level of their homes and outside separate sleeping areas. Combination smoke and CO detectors should be battery operated or have battery backup. Test combination smoke and CO detectors frequently and replace batteries as needed. Consumers should only buy combination smoke and CO detectors that meet both the UL 2034 and UL 217 safety standards.
Individual Commissioners may have statements related to this topic. Please visit www.cpsc.gov/commissioners to search for statements related to this or other topics.