19 C.F.R. § 111.94

Decision on monetary penalty

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

CBP will follow the procedures set forth in part 171 of this chapter in considering any petition for relief filed under § 111.93. After CBP has considered the allegations or complaints set forth in the notice issued under § 111.92 and any timely response made to the notice by the broker or other person, the Fines, Penalties, and Forfeitures Officer will issue a written decision to the broker or other person setting forth the final determination and the findings of fact and conclusions of law on which the determination is based. If the final determination is that the broker or other person is liable for a monetary penalty, the broker or other person must pay the monetary penalty, or make arrangements for payment of the monetary penalty, within 60 calendar days of the date of the written decision. If payment or arrangements for payment are not timely made, CBP will refer the matter to the Department of Justice for institution of appropriate judicial proceedings.

[T.D. 00-17, 65 FR 13891, Mar. 15, 2000, as amended by CBP Dec. 22-21, 87 FR 63321, Oct. 18, 2022]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1999–2010 · leading case: United States v. UPS Customhouse Brokerage, Inc., 686 F. Supp. 2d 1337 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2010).
United States v. UPS Customhouse Brokerage, Inc., 686 F. Supp. 2d 1337 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2010). · cites it 11× “See 19 C.F.R. §§ 111.94 , 171.31. 2 The trial record establishes that the FP & F Officer required to consider the ten factors in imposing the penalties at issue was Mr.”
Lee v. United States, 196 F. Supp. 2d 1351 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2002). · cites it 6× “twice violated 19 C.F.R. § 111.94 as set forth in Violation II, Specifications I and II of the Charges.”
Shiepe v. United States, 36 F. Supp. 2d 402 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1999). · cites it 2× “toms, any statement which was at the time and in light of the circumstances under which it was made, false or misleading with respect to any material fact, or has omitted to state in any application or report any material fact which was required and/or (e) violated any provision…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.