C.F.R. » Title 19 » CHAPTER I—U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY; DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY › PART 174—PROTESTS › Subpart C—Review and Disposition of Protests

19 C.F.R. § 174.31

Judicial review of denial of protest

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

Any person whose protest has been denied, in whole or in part, may contest the denial by filing a civil action in the United States Court of International Trade in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 2632 within 180 days after—

(a) The date of mailing of notice of denial, in whole or in part, of a protest,

(b) The date a protest, for which accelerated disposition was requested, is deemed to have been denied in accordance with § 174.22(d), or

(c) The date that a protest is deemed denied in accordance with § 174.21(b), or § 151.16(g) of this chapter.

[T.D. 78-17, 43 FR 1938, Jan. 13, 1978, as amended by T.D. 85-90, 50 FR 21430, May 24, 1985; T.D. 99-65, 64 FR 43612, Aug. 11, 1999]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases, 1989–2006 · leading case: Forest Prods. Nw., Inc. v. United States, 453 F.3d 1355 (Fed. Cir. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Forest Prods. Nw., Inc. v. United States, 453 F.3d 1355 (Fed. Cir. 2006). “§ 1515 (2000); 19 C.F.R. § 174.31 (2004). The review of denials of protests is within the exclusive jurisdiction of that court.”
Forest Prods. Nw., Inc. v. United States, 62 Fed. Cl. 109 (Fed. Cl. 2004). “§ 1514 (a); 19 C.F.R. § 174.31 . The review of denials of protests is in the exclusive domain of the CIT.”
Cherry Lane Fashion Grp., Inc. v. United States, 712 F. Supp. 190 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1989). · cites it 2× “There is no intimation in 19 C.F.R. § 174.31 , however, that violation of 19 C.”
Brother Int'l Corp. v. United States, 464 F.3d 1319 (Fed. Cir. 2006). “; 19 C.F.R. § 174.31 (2006). However, even if a valid protest is not filed, pursuant to 19 U.”
Swisher Int'l, Inc. v. United States, 205 F.3d 1358 (Fed. Cir. 2000). “19 C.F.R. § 174.31 (1999). Swisher’s protest was denied as a matter of law on March 26, 1995 and as it filed suit in the Court of International Trade on March 29, 1995, its suit was timely filed.”
Apex Oil Co. v. United States Customs Serv. (In re Apex Oil Co.), 122 B.R. 559 (Bankr. E.D. Mo. 1990). “19 CFR § 174.31 . If Customs fails to liquidate entries within specified time limits, those entries are *562 deemed liquidated at the rate of duty, value, quantity, and amount of duties asserted at the time of entry by the importer of record.”
Forest Prods. Nw. v. United States, No. 2005-5007 (Fed. Cir. July 5, 2006). “§ 1515 (2000); 19 C.F.R. § 174.31 (2004). The review of denials of protests is within the exclusive jurisdiction of that court.”
B.B. Pallets, Inc. v. United States, 66 Fed. Cl. 280 (Fed. Cl. 2005). “The immediate unavailability of protest amounted to a jurisdictional “gap” and formed the crux of Forest Product’s case: Forest Products proffers various convoluted arguments in support of its proposition, but which in essence can be boiled down to a single proposition — since…”
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.