Heartland By-Products, Inc. v. United States
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
424 F.3d 1244 (2005)
- Written by Gonzalo Rodriguez, JD
Facts
In 1995, Heartland By-Products, Inc. (Heartland) (plaintiff) obtained an advance ruling from the United States Customs Service (customs) (defendant) classifying prospective syrup imports under subheading 1702.90.40 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States. Four years later, customs revoked the ruling and classified the syrup imports under a different subheading subject to higher tariffs. Heartland filed a complaint in the Court of International Trade seeking pre-importation review of the revocation under 28 U.S.C. § 1581(h) and to enjoin customs from enforcing the revocation. Although the court ruled in favor of Heartland (Heartland I), the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the judgment on appeal. Further, although the appellate court’s decision did not specify on which date the new subheading would apply to Heartland’s imports, customs began liquidating Heartland’s entries under the new classification. Heartland filed a motion for entry of judgment before the Court of International Trade (Heartland III), once again invoking jurisdiction under § 1581(h), asking that the court issue an order stating the date upon which the new classification would apply to Heartland’s imports. Customs argued that the court lacked jurisdiction under § 1581(h) because that provision covered only prospective entries and not actual entries. Although the court disagreed with customs, it nonetheless declined to exercise its jurisdiction under § 1581(h). Years later, Heartland filed another complaint under § 1581(h) challenging customs’ retroactive imposition of the higher duty classification (Heartland IV). The court dismissed the case due to lack of jurisdiction, stating that it had lost jurisdiction under § 1581(h) when it denied Heartland’s first motion for entry of judgment. Heartland appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Michel, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 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.