(a) Demand for liquidated damages. If within 30 days from the date of the notice of redelivery, or such additional period as the Center director may allow for good cause shown, the importer does not properly mark or redeliver all merchandise previously released to him, the port director shall demand payment of liquidated damages incurred under the bond in an amount equal to the entered value of the articles not properly marked or redelivered.
(b) Failure to petition for relief. A written petition addressed to the Commissioner of Customs for relief from the payment of liquidated damages may be filed with the Fines, Penalties, and Forfeitures Officer in accord with part 172 of this chapter.
(c) Relief from full liquidated damages. Any relief from the payment of the full liquidated damages incurred will be contingent upon the deposit of the marking duty required by 19 U.S.C. 1304(f), and the satisfaction of the Fines, Penalties, and Forfeitures Officer that the importer was not guilty of bad faith in permitting the illegally marked articles to be distributed, has been diligent in attempting to secure compliance with the marking requirements, and has attempted by all reasonable means to effect redelivery of the merchandise.
[T.D. 72-262, 37 FR 20318, Sept. 29, 1972, as amended by T.D. 79-159, 44 FR 31969, June 4, 1979; T.D. 83-217, 48 FR 48659, Oct. 20, 1983; T.D. 90-51, 55 FR 28191, July 10, 1990; T.D. 99-27, 64 FR 13675, Mar. 22, 1999; T.D. 00-57, 65 FR 53575, Sept. 5, 2000; CBP Dec. 16-26, 81 FR 93018, Dec. 20, 2016]
Notes of Decisions
Frontier Ins. v. United States, 2002 CIT 12 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2002).
“See 19 C.F.R. § 134.54 . Although Frontier is correct that if the merchandise had not been properly re-marked beyond the 30 day period contained in the Notice to Mark then liquidated damages could have been assessed, it is not a requirement that Customs send an additional Notice…”
Uniroyal, Inc. v. United States, 529 F. Supp. 661 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1981).
“Thereafter, on November 13, 1981, plaintiff applied for a preliminary injunction to restrain the Customs Service from issuing additional notices to mark or redeliver; from initiating any demand for liquidated damages pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 134.54 (a); and from assessing any…”
Uniroyal, Inc. v. United States, 2 Ct. Int'l Trade 291 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1981).
· cites it 2× “Plaintiff now seeks a preliminary injunction to restrain the Customs Service from issuing additional notices to mark or redeliver; from initiating any demand for liquidated damages pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 134.54 (a); from assessing any additional marking duties; and from failing…”
Carrier v. United States, 20 Ct. Int'l Trade 227 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1996).
“19 C.F.R § 134.54(a) (1994) (emphasis added).”
— 19 C.F.R. § 134.54(a) — 1 case
Carrier v. United States, 20 Ct. Int'l Trade 227 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1996).
“19 C.F.R § 134.54(a) (1994) (emphasis added).”
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.