Seko Logistics is dropping its case against the United States, months after the third-party logistics (3PL) services provider had been briefly banned from two import programs by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP).
The logistics provider filed for voluntary dismissal with the U.S. Court of International Trade on Tuesday, three months after the company filed a complaint with the court on the grounds that details of its alleged import violations were never provided.
More from Sourcing Journal
-
Consumers Still Love E-Commerce - Here's How the US Can Compete
-
US Election Puts Business Focus on Trade, Tariffs and Labor Issues
-
ShipBob Fulfills De Minimis-Eligible Orders Out of Canada and Mexico
In late May, Seko Logistics was suspended from participating in the Entry Type 86 and Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT) imports programs.
Just days later, after Seko threatened legal action, the CBP conditionally reinstated the company into both programs. But given the vagueness related to specifics of the violations, as well as the lack of clarity into a future remediation plan, Seko filed the complaint on June 1, seeking out an immediate unconditional reinstatement and a detailed audit report on the Entry Type 86 violations.
The CBP issued a letter to Seko at the behest of the court on June 11, saying that the suspension was based on an analysis of two judgment samples of T86 entries, which each consisted of 10 individual entries. The analysis also included references to two separately noted shipments.
“While CBP cited specific entries for which T86 filing violations were alleged in the Violations Letter, CBP failed to identify any violations of customs laws as a result of Seko’s alleged noncompliance,” Seko said in an August filing. “The Violations Letter also omits how Seko failed to exercise reasonable care.”
Seko had applied for a preliminary injunction against its removal from the programs in June. As an alternative, the firm requested a stay in the lawsuit to learn how CBP attempts to hold Seko liable for alleged third-party fraud since the agency identified specific entries. But a month later, the court denied the company’s plea, finding that it already received all the relief it sought when CBP conditionally reinstated Seko.
The agency requested, and received, a remedial action plan from Seko on July 24 that would correct the violations, which it denied.
In the wake of the denial, the plaintiff claimed that it continues “daily to suffer the irreparable financial and reputational harm associated with Defendant’s initial suspension” of the company from both the Entry Type 86 and C-TPAT programs. The company also said that being required to come up with a remedial plan further damages Seko’s reputation, in that “it is being held accountable for issues that were not caused by Seko.”