In recent years, the trade management system of the United States has not changed significantly. The United States is governed by 1930 tariff and consumption tax act, 1974 trade act, 1988 comprehensive trade and competition act, 1988 international emergency economic power act, 1933 agricultural adjustment act and 1979 export management act. In addition, the United States has signed free trade agreements with Canada, Mexico, Israel and other countries to provide mutually beneficial trade arrangements. The US Congress is responsible for formulating important foreign trade laws and policies. The executive departments headed by the President include the Office of the Trade Representative, the Ministry of Commerce, the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Homeland Security and the Ministry of Agriculture, and are responsible for the implementation of trade laws and policies, tariff collection, import and export management of goods and foreign trade negotiations.
1, tariff system
(1) tariff management system
1930 "customs tax law" and 1988 "comprehensive trade and competition law" are the main laws regulating the formulation and collection of tariffs in the United States. According to 1988 Comprehensive Trade and Competition Law, the United States Congress formulated the harmonized tariff schedule, which came into effect on 1989 1. The United States International Trade Commission modifies or maintains the Harmonized Tariff Schedule according to the requirements of the US Congress, and the Customs and Border Protection Bureau under the US Department of Homeland Security is responsible for interpreting and enforcing the Harmonized Tariff Schedule and other customs laws.
The United States applies MFN tariff treatment to all WTO members except Cuba. In addition, the United States provides preferential tariff treatment through bilateral or regional free trade arrangements.
The United States imposes ad valorem tax on most imported products on the basis of FOB, but imposes ad valorem tax on some imported products, mainly agricultural products. In addition, some products need to pay tariffs at the compound tax rate. Some products, including sugar, are also subject to tariff quotas. On June 5438+1 October1,2009, the United States began to implement the 2009 United States Harmonized Tariff Schedule, and revised the 2008 United States Harmonized Tariff Schedule. However, the revision is mainly carried out by the United States in order to fulfill the obligation of reducing tariffs by stages stipulated in the free trade agreements signed with other countries.
In addition, the US Congress has the right to temporarily suspend or reduce tariffs on some products, most of which are chemicals, raw materials and other industrial raw materials. The decision to reduce tariffs will be incorporated into some laws, and Chapter 99 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule will usually reflect this. The Pension Protection Law of 2006 provided temporary tariff relief for 300 products, including non-woven gloves, nitrocellulose, methyl sorbate and fluoroamide. The Tax Relief and Health Care Law of 2006 provided temporary tariff relief for 500 products, including diethyl sulfate, sorafenib, calcium tranexamate and 16 inch variable speed wire saw. The above two exemptions and reductions are valid until June 65438+February 3, 20091.
(2) tariff level and its adjustment
According to the statistics of WTO, the simple average MFN tariff rate in the United States in 2007 was 3.5%, which was the same as that in 2006 and reached the simple average final binding tariff level in the United States. In 2008, excluding the non-ad valorem tax rate, the simple average MFN applicable tax rate in the United States was 4.4%. In 2007, the simple average MFN tariff rate of agricultural products was 5.5%, and that of non-agricultural products was 3.2%. Compared with the levels of 5.3% and 3.3% in 2006, the former increased, while the latter decreased slightly.
2, the main import management system
(1) basic management system
The United States mainly relies on tariffs to manage and regulate imported products and their quantity, but it also adopts tariff quotas for relatively sensitive imported products such as agricultural products. In addition, due to environmental protection, national security, balance of payments and other reasons, the National Assembly passed the Law on the Protection of Marine Mammals 1972 (Animal Protection), Article 232 of the Trade Expansion Law 1962 (National Security) and Article 122 of the Trade Law 1974.
(2) Changes in 2008
① "10+2" requirements for carriers and importers
On June 5438+10/October 065438, 2008, the US Customs and Border Protection issued an announcement. In order to evaluate and determine high-risk goods and prevent terrorist weapons and goods from entering the United States, importers and carriers must provide additional information about the goods electronically before the cargo ship enters the United States from June 5 to1October 26, 2009. According to the 24-hour warehouse receipt rule published by the United States in 2002, carriers and importers are required to provide certain documents to the US Customs and Border Protection 24 hours before the goods are loaded. On this basis, the new regulations put forward new declaration requirements for carriers and importers.
For the carrier, it is necessary to submit "2" documents on the basis of the original "10" information, which is called "10"+"2". One of these two documents is a description of the loading state of the ship, including the information of the ship and each container, which is used to explain the actual position of the ship loaded with goods. Documents must be sent to the Customs and Border Protection Bureau through electronic channels recognized by the Customs and Border Protection Bureau within 48 hours after the ship leaves; The other is the state information of the container, which determines the movement and state change of the container (such as full or empty state). When there are nine situations listed in the Regulations, the carrier must submit the container state change information to the Customs and Border Protection Bureau within 24 hours after it enters its equipment tracking system.
For importers, it is "2"+"10", that is, an "importer safety statement" must be submitted on the basis of the original two pieces of information, including the following10 pieces of information: seller, buyer, importer registration number/foreign trade zone application identification code, consignee number, manufacturer (provider), consignee, country of origin and commodity. Except that the container packing place and the freight company (stevedores) can inform the Customs and Border Protection Bureau as soon as possible (not later than 24 hours before arrival), other information should be notified to the Bureau 24 hours before shipment.
However, the regulation gives a one-year transition period, that is, it will be fully implemented from 20 10 65438+ 10 26.
② The system of pre-notification of imported food determines the final rules.
In order to implement the Bioterrorism Act of 2002, the US Food and Drug Administration promulgated the Transitional Regulations on the Advance Notification System of Imported Foods in 2003, which stipulated that food importers must submit advance notifications to the Bureau on food imported or to be imported into the United States from 65438+ in February 2003. On June 5438+065438+ 10, 2008, the US Food and Drug Administration announced the final rules of the system, and revised the original rules and provisional final rules. The final rules will take effect on May 6th, 2009. According to the final rule, the importer must notify the US Food and Drug Administration in advance in electronic form 15 days (through the interface of the Food and Drug Administration's advance notification system) or 30 days (through the automatic brokerage interface of the Customs and Border Protection's automatic business system). In advance notice, the confirmation information of the bureau must be obtained within the time limit of not less than 8 hours (if the food is imported by water), not less than 4 hours (if the food is imported by air or rail) and not less than 2 hours (if the food is imported by road and land) before the food arrives at the port of the United States, otherwise the goods will be refused to be imported and detained. The "Rules" also revised some definitions and contents of advance notice in the original provisions.
③ Some textile arrangements subject to quota restrictions.
In 2008, the US Textile Agreement Executive Committee instructed the US Customs and Border Protection to implement phased entry of textiles exceeding the annual quota of the 2008 China-US Textile Quota Agreement. In February 2008, the Committee issued specific arrangements for phased entry. Export goods delivered in 2008 that exceed the annual quota of that year are not allowed to enter the country before February 1 2009. From February/KLOC-0 to February 28th, 2009, goods with a basic quota of 5% in 2008 were allowed to enter the country. After that, every month, from the first day to the last day of each month, only goods equivalent to 5% of the basic quota in 2008 are allowed to enter the country until all consignments exceeding the quota are allowed to enter the country. The monthly 5% phased entry quota is 332/432/632 respectively. T (plus baby socks) products are 4252922 dozen (including 332/432/632? Class B products are 40433 10 dozens), class 347/348 products are 1272 148 dozens, and class 352/652 products are 1225759 dozens.
In addition, the Committee also decided to cancel the original requirements of the electronic visa information system for textiles exported from China on or after June 5438+1 October12009, but for goods exported before that date, even if they enter the United States in 2009, the electronic visa information system and quota requirements are still applicable.
④ New requirements of Lacey Act on the import of plant products.
Lacey Act is the oldest wildlife protection law in the United States, aiming at cracking down on the illegal trade of wildlife, fish and plants. The Food, Protection and Energy Act of 2008 amended the Act, expanded its scope of protection and increased the import declaration requirements for plants and plant products.
According to the new regulations, since May 22, 2008, if any plant is obtained, owned, transported or sold in violation of the laws of any country or foreign country on plant protection; Failing to pay the required patent fees, taxes or forest harvesting fees in accordance with the laws of any state or foreign country in the United States; It is illegal to import, export, transport, sell, receive, purchase or buy plants in interstate or foreign trade in violation of export or re-export restrictions stipulated by any state or foreign laws in the United States. The "plants" referred to in the revised Lacey Act refers to "all wild plants in the plant kingdom, including roots, seeds, components and their products, including trees naturally growing or planted in woodland", except for three types of plants: conventional cultivated plants and conventional food crops (including roots, seeds, components and their products) except trees; Scientific samples of plant propagation materials (including roots, seeds, germplasm, components and their products) used in laboratory or field experiments; Plants to be planted, used or replanted. If plants belong to the second and third categories mentioned above, but they are listed in the annexes of CITES, or endangered or threatened species listed in the 1973 Endangered Species Act, or are native and endangered species according to any state's laws on species protection, such plants are still subject to the newly revised Lacey Act.
From June 5438, 2008+February 65438, 2008+May 2008, all importers must submit a declaration form when importing plants covered by Lacey Act, indicating the scientific names (including plant species names) of all plants in the imported goods, the value of the imported goods, the quantity of relevant plants (including measurement units) and the name of the plant origin. However, plants or plant products specially used as packaging materials to support, protect or load other articles do not need to be declared unless the packaging materials themselves are imported goods.
The United States will implement the above import declaration regulations in stages. Details are as follows:
The first stage: from 2008 12 to 2009 15, which is a voluntary declaration stage;
Phase II: HS-coded products in Chapter 44 (Wood and Wood Products) and Chapter 6 (Living Trees, Plants, Bulbs, Flowers and Decorative Leaves, etc.) from April 1 day, 2009 or the date when the electronic declaration system of the US Customs was put into use. ) will be declared;
Stage III: Since July 1 2009, the HS codes are Chapter 47 (Wood Pulp), Chapter 48 (Paper and Its Products), Chapter 92 (Musical Instruments) and Chapter 94 (Furniture), and the products of the above stage II must be declared.
After September 30th, 2009, USDA will implement import declaration for plants and plant products involved in Lacey Act in stages, including HS code (oilseeds, miscellaneous seeds, grains, seeds, fruits, plants, etc.) in chapter 12. ) and chapter 13 (shellac, gum, resin, plant juice, plant extract). Other plant products), Chapter 45 (cork and cork products), Chapter 46 (baskets and wicker woven products), Chapter 66 (umbrellas, walking sticks and whips), Chapter 82 (tools), Chapter 93 (guns), Chapter 95 (toys, games and sporting goods), Chapter 96 (brooms,
Importers who violate Lacey Law, including those who fail to declare their imports, will be subject to civil and criminal penalties, and their imported products will be confiscated.
Although the main body involved in the declaration and punishment is the importer, the importer will definitely ask the producers and exporters in China to provide information, and the payment after customs clearance will increase the pressure and risk of the producers and exporters in China. Relevant enterprises should communicate well with American customers, be familiar with the contents and implementation of relevant laws in the United States, adjust purchasing strategies, fulfill the "due diligence obligation" required by Lacey Act, and carefully purchase and use some imported timber.
⑤ New regulatory measures for imported catfish.
The Food, Protection and Energy Act of 2008 transferred the supervision function of the US Food and Drug Administration on catfish import to the Ministry of Agriculture, authorized the US Department of Agriculture to define catfish classification, and managed catfish import according to the current regulatory requirements for meat and poultry import inspection. This means that the import supervision of catfish extends from US customs to domestic production and processing, which requires us to evaluate the equivalence of domestic production and processing with reference to American standards. The relevant regulations of USDA are being consulted internally, and are expected to be promulgated in the first half of 2009 and implemented before the end of 2009.
⑥ The United States Customs proposes to cancel the first sale clause in the customs valuation.
The US Customs and Border Protection issued a notice on June 5438+ 10, 2008, proposing to cancel the first sale in the current customs valuation. According to the current law, "transaction price" is the main method to determine the price of imported products, which is defined as the price actually paid or payable for products exported to the United States. In transactions involving a series of sales activities, the US Customs and Border Protection usually determines the transaction price according to the price paid by the buyer in the first or early sales (generally sales between manufacturers and middlemen), as long as the importer can prove that the sales are normal transactions and clearly indicate that the goods are sold for export to the United States. According to the resolution made by the Technical Committee on Customs Valuation of WTO in 2007, the US Customs suggested changing the original practice. In transactions involving a series of sales activities, the transaction price is determined by the price of the last sale before the goods are imported into the United States, not by the price of the first or early transaction. According to this proposal, the transaction value is generally determined by the price paid by the American buyer.
Cancelling the valuation method of "first sale rule" may increase the cost of China exporters. Chinese export enterprises should pay close attention to the progress of the proposal of this regulation, and if possible, consider submitting written opinions to the United States to minimize the negative impact of changing this pricing method on international trade.
3, the main export management system
(1) basic management system
In order to safeguard national security, promote the implementation of American foreign policy, limit the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons and missile technology, and ensure the adequate supply of some materials in short supply in China, the United States has implemented export control on some products with 1979 export management law, export control regulations and arms export control law as the core. The Bureau of Industrial Security of the U.S. Department of Commerce is responsible for the export control of dual-use goods, technologies and services, while the export of products, services and related technical data for military purposes is under the jurisdiction of the State Council, while the Office of Foreign Assets Control of the U.S. Treasury Department is responsible for determining the embargoed countries and embargoed transactions involved in the economic sanctions plan.
(2) Progress in 2008
(1) China and the United States signed the Exchange of Letters on Site Verification of End Users between China and the United States.
On June 5, 2009 +20091October 6, 2009+March 6, 2009, China's Ministry of Commerce and the United States signed the Exchange of Letters on End-User Site Verification between China and the United States. This system allows American exporters to export specific dual-use items directly to foreign end users authorized by VEU without applying for an export license. This exchange of letters mainly indicates that the Bureau of Industrial Safety of the US Department of Commerce will fully implement the verified end-user (VEU) system for relevant enterprises in China.
(2) Amend relevant clauses according to the Wassenaar Agreement.
On June 65438+1October 65438+April, 2008, the Bureau of Industrial Safety of the US Department of Commerce issued a final announcement, announcing the revision of the export management regulations according to the revision opinions reached at the plenary meeting of Wassenaar Agreement at the end of 2007 and the provisions on solar cells reached at the plenary meeting at the end of 2006. The announcement added the export license requirements for the following exports: export and re-export in Part 742.4(a) of the Export Control Regulations, and specific software and technologies related to specific solar cells, solar panels and solar devices under the catalogues of ECCN3D00 1 and 3E00 1. The purpose of this export control is to ensure that the above products do not pose a military threat to other countries. In addition, in order to implement the revision of dual-use goods and technologies in the Wassenaar Agreement, the Bureau of Industrial Safety of the US Department of Commerce revised ECCN Catalogue 1 (raw materials, chemicals, microorganisms and drugs), ECCN Catalogue 2 (raw material production process), ECCN Catalogue 3 (electrical products), ECCN Catalogue 5, Category 1 (radio communication) and Category 5. In order to comply with the relevant provisions of the Wassenaar Agreement, the announcement also revised the Catalogue of ECCN in 27 commercial control lists, adding 1A006 (specially designed equipment and components for handling improvised explosive devices) and 1A007 (power generation equipment and devices).
③ Revise the commercial control list.
Since 2007, the Bureau of Industrial Safety of the US Department of Commerce has regularly reviewed the commercial control list. In April 2008 and June 5438+00, the Bureau of Industrial Safety of the U.S. Department of Commerce issued the final announcements of two periodic reviews. The announcement issued on April 23 (effective on April 23, 2008 18) mainly made technical corrections and classifications to parts 748 and 774 of the commercial control list.
The announcement (1416 October) issued in 65438 significantly revised the commercial control list, including:
First, clarify the existing control measures, such as revising the list of "related control measures" and "clauses";
Second, delete redundant or outdated controls; For example, items (d), (e), (g), (h) and (k) have been deleted from the control item of ECCN 4A994 (supercomputer system with operation speed exceeding 50 million floating-point operations), and item (b) (digital computer) has made it clear that digital computers include those with signal processing and image enhancement functions. Its controlled threshold is increased from the maximum operation speed exceeding 0.000 1 wt (weighted trillions of floating-point operations) to the maximum operation speed exceeding 0.0 128WT; ; ECCN 5A99 1 (communication equipment) deleted three outdated technical parameters;
Third, establish more centralized and reasonable control;
Fourth, in order to be consistent with or more clear about the international system, new controls have been added, including new items and new control reasons. Among them, the new control items include "stored program", "data conversion" and "packet switching and routing". The new reason for adding control under ECCN 1A002 (composite frame or pressure plate) is that the relevant control will apply not only to the articles under this item, but also to the technologies related to the articles.
At the same time, the communique also made two amendments to the Export Control Regulations: (1) In Appendix 7 of Part 742 (Description of Major Weapon Systems), it was made clear that aircraft models did not belong to the "unmanned aerial vehicles" (missiles and missile launchers) mentioned in this part. (2) When Part 744 deals with "restrictions on the end use of certain military assets in China", it is mainly clarified that the items subject to "general restrictions" refer to the items listed in Appendix 2 of Part 744 and controlled by the Export Control Regulations. The purpose of this clarification is mainly because the definition of articles in the original part 742 is relatively broad, including both articles stipulated in the Export Control Regulations and articles not within the above scope.
4. Trade remedy system
(1) basic management system
American trade remedy system can be divided into two aspects: affecting imports and affecting exports. The relief measures applicable to imported products are mainly anti-dumping, countervailing and safeguard measures (for Walter's safeguard measures), as well as Article 337 measures for unfair trade practices (mainly infringing on American intellectual property rights). The trade remedy measures applicable to export products are mainly 30 1 series of clauses and measures.
At present, the main anti-dumping and countervailing law in the United States is the customs tax law of 1930, and the specific administrative regulations are distributed in the Code of Federal Regulations of the United States 19. The Import Trade Bureau of the International Trade Department of the US Department of Commerce is responsible for the investigation of dumping and subsidies and the calculation of dumping subsidies, and the US International Trade Commission is responsible for the investigation of industrial injuries. The President may take safeguard measures for specific imported products as authorized by sections 20 1 to 204 of the 1974 Trade Law. For imported products suspected of infringing on American intellectual property rights, the United States mainly protects the rights and interests of American intellectual property owners through Article 337 of 1930 Tariff and Tax Law. The United States International Trade Commission is the enforcement agency of Section 337. The agency can issue an exclusion order instructing the customs to prohibit the import of goods that infringe the intellectual property rights of the United States.
1974 article 30 1 of the trade law is the main law to safeguard the rights and interests of American companies, expand the overseas market access of American products and services, and oppose foreign infringement of intellectual property rights that affects the export of American products. This law provides specific procedures for the US Trade Representative to investigate foreign infringement and seek solutions through consultation with foreign governments. The 30 1 series clauses are specifically implemented by the office of the US Trade Representative.
(2) Progress in 2008
(1) The Ministry of Commerce revised the provisions on the nature of processing or contractors in the anti-dumping investigation.
On March 28th, 2008, the U.S. Department of Commerce announced the provisional regulations, announcing the immediate cancellation of the practices of processors or contractors in determining export prices, structural export prices, fair values and normal values in anti-dumping investigations stipulated in the original anti-dumping regulations of the U.S. Department of Commerce19CFR 351.401(h).
According to the original regulations, if the processor or contractor of the product under investigation has not obtained the ownership of the product under investigation and has not controlled the relevant sales of the product under investigation, it should not be recognized as the manufacturer or producer of the product under investigation.
According to the U.S. Department of Commerce, the original intention of the original regulation was to ensure that the dumping margin of the products under investigation could be concentrated on the party that decided the price of the products under investigation when the production of the products was subcontracted to another company. However, the US International Trade Court held that because of this provision, American enterprises that should have been recognized as buyers of the products under investigation obtained the status of "foreign producers", which affected the determination of export price, structural export price, fair value and normal value by the US Department of Commerce when calculating the dumping margin, and could not achieve the set goals of the Regulations. This ruling of the International Trade Court will restrict the discretion of the Ministry of Commerce and require the Ministry of Commerce to identify the wrong entity as the seller of the product under investigation. This is inconsistent with the responsibility of the Ministry of Commerce to provide relief for domestic industries, so the Ministry of Commerce decided to stop this provision and take a case-by-case approach in future cases. The interim provisions came into effect on March 28, 2008.
The revision of this rule means that the possibility of processing trade enterprises being identified as manufacturers or producers of products under investigation increases, and the pressure of responding to lawsuits also increases.
(2) The Ministry of Commerce announced the wage standards of enterprises in anti-dumping investigations against non-market economy countries.
In the anti-dumping investigation procedure involving non-market economy, the US Department of Commerce has long calculated a hypothetical non-market economy wage replacement for it. These assumed non-market economy wages are calculated once a year. The US Department of Commerce calculates the annual wage level of non-market economies in two steps. Firstly, the relationship between hourly wage rate (data from ILO Yearbook of Labor Statistics) and per capita national income (data from the World Bank) is analyzed by least square regression. Secondly, the per capita national income of non-market economies recognized by the Ministry of Commerce is substituted into the regression results, so as to obtain the hypothetical hourly wage rate of non-market economies.
On April 1 1 day, 2008, the US Department of Commerce announced the assumed wages of non-market economy countries in 2007, of which the wages in China were 1.06 USD/hour. This time, the U.S. Department of Commerce estimated the hourly wage rates of 6 1 market economies (data from the Yearbook of Labor Statistics of the International Labour Organization) and per capita national income (data from the World Bank) in China, Belarus, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Moldova, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Vietnam 10 non-market economies. In the published wage standard, China ranks second only to Belarus.
(3) The Ministry of Commerce collects opinions on targeted dumping in anti-dumping investigations.
On May 9, 2008, the U.S. Department of Commerce published an announcement in the Federal Register to solicit public opinions on the identification and analysis methods of target dumping in anti-dumping investigations.
On June 25th, 2007, the US Department of Commerce issued an announcement to solicit a round of opinions. In anti-dumping investigations, the US Department of Commerce usually calculates the dumping margin by weighted average to weighted average or transaction by transaction. At the same time, American law stipulates that if there are significant differences in export price patterns due to different buyers, regions and time periods, it can be determined that there is target dumping, so the weighted average-to-transaction method can be adopted. In the last announcement, the US Department of Commerce solicited public opinions on how to determine the target dumping. In this announcement, the U.S. Department of Commerce announced its preliminary method for determining and analyzing target dumping, and solicited public opinions on this method again.
④ The U.S. Department of Commerce solicited opinions on the issue of testing below cost in anti-dumping investigation.
On May 9, 2008, the U.S. Department of Commerce published an announcement in the Federal Register to solicit public opinions on the issue of below-cost testing in anti-dumping investigations. The U.S. Department of Commerce explained that when calculating the normal value, sales in the normal course of trade are considered, and whether a sale belongs to the normal course of trade needs to be tested below the cost. However, the law does not stipulate the use of a single period or multiple periods as the period for calculating expenses. In most cases, the US Department of Commerce takes the investigation period or review period as a separate time period to calculate the cost. In limited cases, the U.S. Department of Commerce has adopted a shorter time limit. This time, the U.S. Department of Commerce asked for advice on whether and under what circumstances to adopt a shorter period.
⑤ The US International Trade Commission revised the 337 investigation procedure.
On July 7, 2008, the United States International Trade Commission published new regulations on the investigation procedure of 337, which took effect on August 6, 2008. The new regulations will have an impact on the pending cases and future cases of the International Trade Commission.
The new rules are used to regulate the investigation of the International Trade Commission, and many amendments are procedural, among which the more important amendments mainly involve the following four aspects:
First, the written materials that should be submitted for investigation. The International Trade Commission has revised the contents of Articles 19, 210.12 (a) (9) (viii) of the Federal Regulations, and the applicant shall attach the patent claim chart related to his independent patent claim to the indictment. Previously, the plaintiff only needed to provide a sample claim for each patent. In addition, the patentee can still claim dependent claims without providing the claims.
Second, the requirements for submitting a license contract. The newly revised sections (9) (IV), (10) (I) and (10) (II) of Article 19 of the Federal Regulations were first added to reduce the necessity of submission by the prosecution. At the same time, the International Trade Commission also revised the contents of (c) (1), (d), (f) and (g), stipulating that the above licensing contract documents are only required to be submitted when the plaintiff needs to seek to meet the jurisdiction requirements of domestic industries through his own licensing behavior or the behavior of the licensee in his own country.
Third, about the investigation period. The newly revised article 19, sections 2 10.42, 2 10.43, 2 10.5 1 stipulates that the investigation period that the administrative judge can set is 15 months. At the same time, unless otherwise stipulated by the International Trade Commission, the administrative judge shall submit a preliminary ruling on whether it violates Article 337 to the International Trade Commission four months (not only three months) before the expiration of the above investigation period.
Fourth, the page limit requirements for reconsideration requests. Any party may submit the "preliminary ruling" made by the administrative judge to the International Trade Commission for reconsideration. In the past, because there was no page limit for reconsideration, it was usually hundreds of pages long. Articles 19 and 2 10.43(b)( 1) of the newly revised Federal Regulations stipulate that when the length of an application for reconsideration exceeds 50 pages, the abstract part shall not exceed 10, and the length of the application for reconsideration shall be 100. Since the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has also put forward a 30-page limit, the limit of 100 page is applicable to any type of dispute that the parties may appeal to the federal court.