Delphi Petroleum, Inc. v. United States
United States Court of International Trade
662 F. Supp. 2d 1348 (2009)
- Written by Gonzalo Rodriguez, JD
Facts
Between 1998 and 2002, Delphi Petroleum, Inc. (Delphi) (plaintiff) filed drawback entries under 19 U.S.C. § 1313(p) on petroleum products it imported and then exported. In its filings, Delphi included a notice reserving its right to seek refund of applicable Harbor Maintenance Tax (HMT) and Merchandise Processing Fees (MPF). Delphi included this notice at the direction of a representative of the United States Customs Service (customs) (defendant) who told Delphi that it could not seek refund of HMT and MPF payments until customs changed its policy on these payments. Customs granted the requests in 2003 and refunded Delphi 99 percent of duties paid. At that time, Delphi filed a protest requesting HMT and MPF refunds for its entries. Customs denied Delphi’s requests relating to entries prior to the year 2000, as those were beyond the three-year statute of limitations. Delphi challenged customs’ denial, arguing that its notice to customs included with the drawback claims protected its HMT and MPF claims. In the alternative, Delphi argued that customs was responsible for its failure to file the claims because Delphi was told by a customs representative not to file until customs’ policies on HMT and MPF refunds changed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Restani, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 802,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.