throbber
Case 1:21-cv-00123-GSK Document 15 Filed 03/24/21 Page 1 of 16
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE
`
`
` --------------------------------------------------------------------- X
`ROOT SCIENCES, LLC
`:
`
`:
`
`:
`
`:
`
`:
`
`:
`THE UNITED STATES
`:
`
`:
`Defendant.
`
`
`:
`
` --------------------------------------------------------------------- X
`COMPLAINT
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`
`
`No. 21-00123
`
`Plaintiff, ROOT SCIENCES LLC, by and through its undersigned counsel, for its
`
`Complaint in this matter against Defendant, the UNITED STATES, does hereby state, plead, and
`
`allege as follows:
`
`CAUSE OF ACTION
`
`1.
`
`This action is commenced by Plaintiff Root Sciences LLC (“Plaintiff” or “Root
`
`Sciences”) to contest the deemed denial of its protest against the exclusion of certain merchandise,
`
`consisting of certain parts for a Cryo-Ethanol Extraction System (Devex GmbH Model No.
`
`CryoEXS 400), from entry into the United States.
`
`JURISDICTION
`
`2.
`
`This Court has exclusive subject matter jurisdiction of this action pursuant to 28
`
`U.S.C. § 1581(a).
`
`PARTIES
`
`3.
`
`Plaintiff Root Sciences is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of
`
`the State of Washington. Headquartered in Belfair, WA, it is engaged in the importation,
`
`manufacture, and distribution of merchandise for the cannabis and hemp processing industry.
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-00123-GSK Document 15 Filed 03/24/21 Page 2 of 16
`
`Among Root Sciences’ customers are processors of hemp, which is legal under Federal law and
`
`the laws of most states including, as relevant here, California and Washington State. Additionally,
`
`Root Sciences distributes its merchandise to state-licensed processors of legal hemp and cannabis
`
`whose use of the merchandise is subject to stringent state authorization and licensing systems.
`
`Plaintiff’s imported merchandise has been excluded by CBP at the Port of Los Angeles/Long
`
`Beach, Port Code 2704.
`
`4.
`
`Defendant United States is the federal defendant. The actions complained of herein
`
`were undertaken by its agency U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“Customs” or “CBP”), which
`
`is a component of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”). CBP is the federal agency
`
`charged with making admissibility determinations under 19 U.S.C. § 1595a.
`
`STATEMENT OF FACTS
`
`5.
`
`Root Sciences imported the subject merchandise, described below, into the U.S.
`
`under cover of Los Angeles/Long Beach (“LA/LB”) Entry No. F23-9253382-4 on December 18,
`
`2020. See Customs Form (“CF”) 7501, Compl. Ex. A, at Protest Ex. B.
`
`6.
`
`The merchandise in Entry No. F23-9253382-4 was presented to CBP for
`
`examination on or around December 18, 2020. It consists of certain parts, specifically the feed
`
`vessel, for a Cryo-Ethanol Extraction System (Devex GmbH Model No. CryoEXS 400)
`
`(“CryoEXS400”). The CryoEXS 400 is an all-in-one cryo-extraction, solvent recovery and
`
`decarboxylation system designed for the recovery of cannabis crude extract from cannabis
`
`biomass. Cryo-ethanol extraction (a/k/a cold ethanol extraction) is an efficient solution for large-
`
`scale hemp and cannabis processing. It produces a cannabinoid-rich crude extract that is ideal for
`
`further refinement (e.g., using short-path distillation machines) into high purity distillates and
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-00123-GSK Document 15 Filed 03/24/21 Page 3 of 16
`
`isolates. The CryoEXS400 is manufactured by Devex GmbH, of Splieterstr. 70, 48231 Warendorf,
`
`Germany (“Devex”). See e.g., CryoEXS 400 Product Brochure, Compl. Ex. A, at Protest Ex. C.
`
`7.
`
`The CryoEXS400 is depicted below (id.):
`
`The parts of the CryoEXS400 imported under cover of Entry No. F23-9253382-4, which are at
`
`issue in this action, consist of the hopper feed vessel of the CryoEXS400 (the “Subject
`
`Merchandise”), which is depicted in the upper left portion of the above-image, and isolated below
`
`in the following image (id.):
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`8.
`
`CBP detained the Subject Merchandise on January 13, 2021. See DHS Form 6051,
`
`Detention Notice and Custody Receipt for Detained Property (“Notice of Detention”), Compl.
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-00123-GSK Document 15 Filed 03/24/21 Page 4 of 16
`
`Ex. A, at Protest Ex. A. The Notice of Detention, which is the best evidence of its contents, states
`
`that the Subject Merchandise was detained on suspicion that it was “possible drug paraphernalia.”
`
`9.
`
`Plaintiff, on its own accord, through its agents, and/or through counsel, has made
`
`numerous requests for an opportunity to confer with CBP at the Port of LA/LB. These requests
`
`have been made as early as January 2021 orally by telephone and voicemail to LA/LB’s entry
`
`specialist teams, LA/LB’s Trade Interface Unit (“TIU”), and to personnel at the CBP Center for
`
`Excellence and Expertise (“CEE”) for Machinery, which is headquartered at the Port of Laredo,
`
`TX, and in writing by e-mail to LA/LB’s entry specialist teams and LA/LB’s TIU. On each
`
`occasion, CBP has refused to substantively communicate information about the detention,
`
`affording Plaintiff no opportunity to correspond or communicate with CBP about the Subject
`
`Merchandise.
`
`10.
`
`CBP has not issued any requests for information or other inquiries to plaintiff
`
`regarding the excluded merchandise.
`
`11.
`
`The Subject Merchandise was deemed excluded by operation of 19 U.S.C.
`
`§ 1499(c)(5) thirty (30) days after issuance of the notice of detention.
`
`12.
`
`Plaintiff timely protested the deemed exclusion of the Subject Merchandise on
`
`February 18, 2021 by filing LA/LB Port Protest No. 2704-21152312 (the “Protest”), pursuant to
`
`19 C.F.R. § 1499(c), and 19 C.F.R. §§ 174.13 and 174.21(b), which require review and action by
`
`CBP “within 30 days from the date the protest was filed.” See Protest and Memorandum of Points
`
`and Authorities in Support of Protest, Compl. Ex. A. The CBP regulations further provide that
`
`“[a]ny protest filed pursuant to this paragraph which is not allowed or denied in whole or in part
`
`before the 30th day after the day on which the protest was filed shall be treated as having been
`
`denied on such 30th day for purposes of 28 U.S.C. 1581.”
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-00123-GSK Document 15 Filed 03/24/21 Page 5 of 16
`
`13.
`
`The subject excluded merchandise is intended for, and necessary for, a
`
`CRYOEX400 Cryo-Ethanol Extraction System which is being installed at the premises of one of
`
`plaintiff’s customers, which customer is located in the State of California.
`
`14.
`
`California is a State which has legalized marijuana and whose laws authorize the
`
`possession, installation and use of devices for the processing of cannabis, such as the CRYOEX400
`
`Cryo-Ethanol Extraction System.
`
`15.
`
`The protest, and supporting materials submitted therewith, contended that the
`
`Subject Merchandise is used in the hemp and cannabis industry but is not an importation contrary
`
`to law under 19 U.S.C. § 1595(a)(c)(2), and is not prohibited “drug paraphernalia” under 21 U.S.C.
`
`§ 863(a). See Compl. Ex. A. Rather, it is subject to the authorization exemption of 21 U.S.C. §
`
`863(f)(1), which allows those “authorized by local, State, or Federal law” to engage in the
`
`otherwise prohibited conduct, including the importation of the Subject Merchandise. The Subject
`
`Merchandise should have been allowed entry because its distribution, possession, and manufacture
`
`has been explicitly authorized by the laws of the State of California, and Washington State.
`
`16.
`
`Plaintiff’s protest was deemed denied pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 174.21(b) on March
`
`20, 2021—i.e., “the 30th day after the day on which the protest was filed … ” Id.
`
`17.
`
`Plaintiff timely filed this action to challenge the denial of its protest on March 22,
`
`2021.
`
`COUNT I
`
`18.
`
`Paragraphs 1 through 17 are restated and incorporated by reference as though fully
`
`set out herein.
`
`19. Merchandise may be excluded from entry, and subjected to other sanctions, if inter
`
`alia “its importation or entry is subject to any restriction or prohibition which is imposed by law
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-00123-GSK Document 15 Filed 03/24/21 Page 6 of 16
`
`relating to health, safety, or conservation and the merchandise is not in compliance with the
`
`applicable rule, regulation, or statute[.]” 19 U.S.C. § 1595a(c)(2)(A).
`
`20. Merchandise imported into the United States in violation of the drug paraphernalia
`
`restrictions of the Mail Order Drug Paraphernalia Control Act of 1986 (“Paraphernalia Control
`
`Act”), Pub. L. 99-570, 100 Stat. 3207-51, 21 U.S.C. § 863, see also Controlled Substances Act
`
`(“CSA”), Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970, Pub. L. No. 91-513,
`
`84 Stat. 1236 (codified as amended at 21 U.S.C. §§ 801-972), can be excluded, and seized by CBP
`
`under authority of 19 U.S.C. § 1595a(c)(2)(A). 21 U.S.C. § 863. The CSA makes it “unlawful for
`
`any person—
`
`(1) to sell or offer for sale drug paraphernalia;
`
`(2) to use the mails or any other facility of interstate commerce to transport drug
`paraphernalia; or
`
`(3) to import or export drug paraphernalia.
`
`Id. at § 863(a).
`
`21.
`
`“Marijuana” is defined as “all parts of the plant Cannabis sativa L., whether
`
`growing or not; the seeds thereof; the resin extracted from any part of such plant; and every
`
`compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of such plant, its seeds or resin.”
`
`21 U.S.C. § 806(a)(16)(A). “Marijuana” is classified as a Schedule I controlled substance under
`
`federal law, making it unlawful for any person to knowingly possess, dispense, distribute, or
`
`manufacture it. 21 U.S.C. § 841(a).
`
`22.
`
`“Hemp” is defined as “the plant Cannabis sativa L. and any part of that plant,
`
`including the seeds thereof and all derivatives, extracts, cannabinoids, isomers, acids, salts, and
`
`salts of isomers, whether growing or not, with a delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol [“THC”]
`
`concentration of not more than 0.3 percent on a dry weight basis.” 7 U.S.C. § 1639o(1). Hemp
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-00123-GSK Document 15 Filed 03/24/21 Page 7 of 16
`
`plants naturally contain a variable amount of the compounds CBD and typically contain less than
`
`1% THC. Marijuana, on the other hand, typically contains 5% THC or more. CBD can also be
`
`found in cannabis strains that possess significant levels of THC compounds; in other cases, CBD
`
`is found in strains that do not possess more than trace amounts of THC.
`
`23.
`
`“Drug paraphernalia,” as statutorily defined, covers a wide range of items used to
`
`prepare, conceal, and ingest controlled substances. According to the Paraphernalia Control Act,
`
`which is the best evidence of its contents, “Drug Paraphernalia” is defined as:
`
` … any equipment, product, or material of any kind which is primarily intended or
`designed for use in manufacturing, compounding, converting, concealing,
`producing, processing, preparing, injecting, ingesting, inhaling, or otherwise
`introducing into the human body a controlled substance, possession of which is
`unlawful under this subchapter. It includes items primarily intended or designed for
`use in ingesting, inhaling, or otherwise introducing marijuana, cocaine, hashish,
`hashish oil, PCP, methamphetamine, or amphetamines into the human body …
`
`Id. at § 863(d).
`
`24.
`
`The Paraphernalia Control Act makes unlawful certain paraphernalia-related
`
`activities, id. at § 863(a), but the prohibition is not absolute.
`
`25.
`
`Congress enacted a statutory exemption to the Paraphernalia Control Act at 21
`
`U.S.C. § 863(f)(1), which demands consideration of local, state, and/or federal authorizations of
`
`the manufacture, possession, or distribution of merchandise meeting the federal definition of “drug
`
`paraphernalia,” providing (emphasis added):
`
`(f) Exemptions. This section shall not apply to—
`
`(1) any person authorized by local, State, or Federal law to manufacture,
`possess, or distribute such items.
`
`This exemption removes the prohibitions of § 863(a) for any “person”—including corporate
`
`persons—authorized by local, state, or federal law to manufacture, possess, or distribute “drug
`
`paraphernalia.”
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-00123-GSK Document 15 Filed 03/24/21 Page 8 of 16
`
`26.
`
`Although prohibited by federal law, 21 U.S.C. § 841(a), nearly every state has
`
`legalized marijuana in one form or another. See Robert A. Mikos, Only One State Has Not Yet
`
`Legalized Marijuana
`
`in
`
`Some
`
`Form … , Vand. U.
`
`(July
`
`16,
`
`2018),
`
`https://my.vanderbilt.edu/marijuanalaw/2018/11/update-voters-in-3-of-4-states-approve-
`
`marijuana-legalization-measures (last accessed March 17, 2021). Numerous states have enacted
`
`laws legalizing, inter alia, the growing, processing, possession and distribution and sale of
`
`marijuana for, inter alia, recreational and medical use. As of Nov. 3, 2020, 36 states (including
`
`Washington D.C.) have adopted medical marijuana laws, and 15 of those states (in addition to
`
`Washington DC) have adopted recreational marijuana laws. See Robert A. Mikos, Marijuana
`
`Reforms Win
`
`Big
`
`at
`
`the
`
`Polls … Vand.
`
`U.
`
`(November
`
`4,
`
`2020),
`
`https://my.vanderbilt.edu/marijuanalaw/2020/11/marijuana-reforms-win-big-at-the-polls/
`
`(last
`
`accessed March 17, 2021). States have also enacted laws legalizing and authorizing the
`
`manufacture, possession, and distribution of merchandise meeting the federal definition of “drug
`
`paraphernalia,” see 21 U.S.C. § 863(d), by persons over the age of 21.
`
`27.
`
`Congress prescribed that the operation of the Paraphernalia Control Act would be
`
`inapplicable in cases where a State has enacted laws legalizing, taxing, and/or regulating the use,
`
`possession, and distribution of medical and recreational marijuana. The federal authorization
`
`exemption, 21 U.S.C. § 863(f)(1), makes clear that CBP has no authority to seize (or exclude, by
`
`refusing to make an admissibility determination) imported “drug paraphernalia,” as defined under
`
`§ 863(d), as an importation “contrary to law” under 19 U.S.C. § 1595a(c), when state law serves
`
`to authorize its manufacture, possession, or distribution. Congress clearly empowered States to
`
`enact laws that take advantage of the 21 U.S.C. § 863(f)(1) authorization exemption so that all
`
`persons (whether individual or corporate) doing lawful business under the laws of a relevant
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-00123-GSK Document 15 Filed 03/24/21 Page 9 of 16
`
`State(s) can be shielded from the consequences that may otherwise attach under the Paraphernalia
`
`Control Act.
`
`28.
`
`Root Sciences is a Washington State limited liability corporation with its principal
`
`place of business in Belfair, WA.
`
`29. Washington State legalized the recreational use of marijuana in 2012 when its
`
`citizens voted to pass Initiative 502 (“I-502”), 2013 Wash. Laws. ch. 3, § 20(3). The Washington
`
`State Liquor and Cannabis Board (“WSLCB”) regulates Washington’s cannabis market, creating
`
`and enforcing rules regarding marijuana. Per the Revised Code of Washington (“RCW”), which is
`
`the best evidence of its contents, a person in the State of Washington violates the drug
`
`paraphernalia laws if they use, deliver, or possess any “equipment, products, [or] materials of any
`
`kind” to “plant, propagate, cultivate, grow, harvest, manufacture, compound, convert, produce,
`
`process, prepare, test, analyze, pack, repack, store, contain, conceal, inject, ingest, inhale, or
`
`otherwise introduce into the human body a controlled substance other than marijuana.”
`
`RCW 69.50.412 (emphasis added); see also WAC 314-55-010 (excluding from the definition of
`
`“paraphernalia” all “items for growing, cultivating, and processing marijuana[.]”). Accordingly,
`
`under Washington State law, the possession, manufacture, or distribution of marijuana-related
`
`“equipment, products, and materials of any kind” is authorized.
`
`30. Washington State law imposes significant and stringent requirements on marijuana
`
`extractors. See e.g., WAC 314-55-104 (“Marijuana Processor License Extraction Requirements”),
`
`which is the best evidence of its contents. These requirements include, but are not limited to, the
`
`following:
`
`• Professional grade closed loop extraction system must be commercially
`manufactured and bear a permanently affixed and visible serial number;
`• Licensed engineer review and prior certification from state-licensed engineer must
`be provided to the WSLCB to certify that the system was (i) commercially
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-00123-GSK Document 15 Filed 03/24/21 Page 10 of 16
`
`manufactured; (ii) safe for its intended use (i.e., as a professional grade closed loop
`extraction system); and (iii) built to “codes of recognized and generally accepted
`good engineering practices” (e.g., ASME, ANSI, UL, ASTM).
`• Certification of the professional grade closed loop extraction system must contain
`signature and stamp of a professional engineer and the serial number of the ex-
`traction unit being certified.
`• Before the item is sold, the technical report accompanying a particular professional
`grade closed loop extraction system must be approved by the state building code
`officials, see e.g., WAC 51-54A-3800.
`
`31.
`
`The merchandise which is the subject of this request was imported into the United
`
`States before being detained and excluded at the Port of Los Angeles/Long Beach, CA.
`
`32.
`
`Cannabis in California has been legal for medical use since 1996, and for
`
`recreational use since 2016. California’s marijuana paraphernalia law specifically addresses the
`
`federal Paraphernalia Control Act and authorization exemption of 21 U.S.C. § 863(f)(1). See
`
`Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act, 2016 Cal. Legis. Serv. 1 (codified as
`
`amended in scattered sections of Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code, Cal. Food & Agric. Code, Cal. Health &
`
`Safety Code, Cal. Lab. Code, Cal. Rev. & Tax Code, and Cal. Water Code). California’s marijuana
`
`paraphernalia law, which is the best evidence of its contents, (i) makes it “lawful” to possess,
`
`transport, purchase, procure, use, manufacture, and give away marijuana “accessories” to persons
`
`over twenty-one years of age, see Cal. Health & Safety Code § 11362.1(a)(5) (“[i]t shall be lawful
`
`under state and local law…for persons 21 years of age or older to…[p]ossess, transport, purchase,
`
`obtain, use, manufacture, or give away cannabis accessories to persons 21 years of age or older
`
`without any compensation whatsoever.”); and (ii) defines marijuana “accessories” with language
`
`that closely follows the federal definition of paraphernalia, stating:
`
`“Cannabis accessories” means any equipment, products or materials of any kind
`which are used, intended for use, or designed for use in planting, propagating,
`cultivating, growing, harvesting, manufacturing, compounding, converting,
`producing, processing, preparing, testing, analyzing, packaging, repackaging,
`storing, smoking, vaporizing, or containing cannabis, or for ingesting, inhaling, or
`otherwise introducing cannabis or cannabis products into the human body.;
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-00123-GSK Document 15 Filed 03/24/21 Page 11 of 16
`
`See Cal. Health & Safety Code § 11018.2; cf 21 U.S.C. § 863(d) (“The term ‘drug paraphernalia’
`
`means any equipment, product, or material of any kind which is primarily intended or designed
`
`for use in manufacturing, compounding, converting, concealing, producing, processing, preparing,
`
`injecting, ingesting, inhaling, or otherwise introducing into the human body a controlled substance,
`
`possession of which is unlawful ...”); (iii) clarifies that by making paraphernalia-related activities
`
`lawful, the California law “intend[s] to meet the requirements of subsection (f) of Section 863 of
`
`Title 21 of the United States Code (21 U.S.C. Sec. 863(f))”—the 21 U.S.C. § 863(f)(1)
`
`authorization exemption—“by authorizing, under state law, any person in compliance with this
`
`section to manufacture, possess, or distribute cannabis accessories,” see Cal. Health & Safety Code
`
`§ 11362.1(b); and (iv) that paraphernalia should not be subject to the penalties imposed by the
`
`Paraphernalia Control Act, stating that items deemed “lawful” by the provision “are not contraband
`
`nor subject to seizure, and no conduct deemed lawful by this [provision] shall constitute the basis
`
`for detention, search, or arrest.” Id. § 11362.1(c).
`
`33.
`
`California and Washington State laws concerning marijuana paraphernalia
`
`affirmatively authorize conduct otherwise prohibited by the federal Paraphernalia Control Act,
`
`deeming federally prohibited paraphernalia activities “lawful” and eliminating the Paraphernalia
`
`Control Act’s prohibitions, including the federal prohibition on importation contained at 21 U.S.C.
`
`§ 863(a), and attaching consequences, including seizure and forfeiture, id. at § 863(c). By invoking
`
`the authorization exemption of 21 U.S.C. § 863(f)(1), Washington State and California laws inter
`
`alia eliminate the federal prohibition on importing marijuana paraphernalia, which also serves to
`
`eliminate any claim that the importation of marijuana paraphernalia into such states is an
`
`importation “contrary to law” under 19 U.S.C. § 1595a(c).
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-00123-GSK Document 15 Filed 03/24/21 Page 12 of 16
`
`34. While 21 U.S.C. § 863(f)(1) clearly exempts from the prohibitions of 21 U.S.C.
`
`§ 863(a) any person who is authorized by local, state, or federal law to manufacture, possess, or
`
`distribute “drug paraphernalia,” CBP has not consistently recognized this statutory exemption in
`
`determining the admissibility of cannabis and hemp processing equipment and parts thereof when
`
`imported into states such as California and Washington State that have explicitly authorized the
`
`possession, distribution, and manufacture of merchandise meeting the federal definition of “drug
`
`paraphernalia.” 19 U.S.C. § 863(d).
`
`35.
`
`The Subject Merchandise, consisting of parts to the CryoEXS400 extraction
`
`system, has been subject to prior review and certification by third party engineers as required by
`
`state law and related regulations. See e.g., WAC 314-55-104. The Engineer Certification Report
`
`(see Pressure Safety Inspectors, Technical Report No. 201910008, Rev. 0 (August 20, 2020), see
`
`Compl. Ex. A, at Protest Ex. D), demonstrates that the CryoEXS 400 has undergone strict technical
`
`safety reviews of the system designs by professional engineers licensed by numerous states. The
`
`design of the CryoEXS 400 extraction system has been approved by state-certified professional
`
`engineers from more than two dozen states including Washington State and California.
`
`36.
`
`Root Sciences’ imported merchandise has been detained, seized, excluded—and
`
`generally harassed—at numerous ports upon entry into the United States. In each prior instance,
`
`the merchandise was imported at U.S. ports of entry located within states that have enacted laws
`
`that unquestionably trigger the federal authorization exemption of 21 U.S.C. § 863(f)(1).
`
`37.
`
`The instant exclusion is unlawful and disregards the clear intent of Congress which
`
`seeks to recognize State laws governing merchandise meeting the federal definition of “drug
`
`paraphernalia.” See 21 U.S.C. § 863(d).
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-00123-GSK Document 15 Filed 03/24/21 Page 13 of 16
`
`38.
`
`Defendant wrongfully excluded the Subject Merchandise from entry, and the
`
`deemed denial of Root Sciences’ Protest against the exclusion must be overturned.
`
`39.
`
`Furthermore, 19 U.S.C. § 1499(c)(5)(C), which is the best evidence of its contents,
`
`provides:
`
`Notwithstanding section 2639 of title 28, once an action respecting a detention is
`commenced, unless the Customs Service establishes by a preponderance of the
`evidence that an admissibility decision has not been reached for good cause, the
`court shall grant the appropriate relief which may include, but is not limited to, an
`order to cancel the detention and release the merchandise.
`
`40.
`
`There are no outstanding requests from CBP for information or other data regarding
`
`the subject merchandise which provides CBP good cause for not having made a determination
`
`regarding the admissibility of the subject merchandise, despite having had three (3) months to do
`
`so.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays that this Court direct defendant to show cause why it has
`
`not made a determination of admissibility regarding the subject merchandise; enter judgment in
`
`plaintiff’s favor, and direct Defendant to allow the entry of the Subject Merchandise; and further
`
`that the Court award Plaintiff costs of suit plus attorneys’ fees; and to provide Plaintiff with such
`
`other and further relief as this Court may deem just.
`
`
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-00123-GSK Document 15 Filed 03/24/21 Page 14 of 16
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: March 24, 2021
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`NEVILLE PETERSON LLP
`
`
`/s/ Richard F. O’Neill
` Richard F. O’Neill
`999 Third Ave., Ste. 2525
`Seattle, WA 98104
`(206) 518-9335
`roneill@npwny.com
`
`/s/ John M. Peterson
`
`John M. Peterson
`Patrick B. Klein
`One Exchange Plaza
`55 Broadway, Suite 2602
`New York, NY 10006
`(212) 635-2730
`jpeterson@npwny.com
`
`
`
`
`
`14
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-00123-GSK Document 15 Filed 03/24/21 Page 15 of 16
`
`COMPLAINT EXHIBIT LIST
`
`A
`
`
`
`
`
`Compl. Ex. Description
`
`Exclusion Protest and Memorandum of Points and Authorities
`in Support of Protest
`
`Protest Ex. A: CBP Notice of Detention (April 10, 2020)
`
`Protest Ex. B: CF 7501, Entry No. F23-9253382-4
`
`Protest Ex. C: CryoEXS400 Product Brochure
`
`Protest Ex. D: CryoEXS400 Engineer Report, Pressure Safety
`Inspectors, Technical Report No. 201910008, Rev. 0
`(August 20, 2020)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Confidential?
`
`No
`
`No
`
`Yes
`
`No
`
`No
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-00123-GSK Document 15 Filed 03/24/21 Page 16 of 16
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE
`
`
` --------------------------------------------------------------------- X
`ROOT SCIENCES, LLC
`:
`
`:
`
`:
`
`:
`
`:
`
`:
`THE UNITED STATES
`:
`
`:
`Defendant.
`
`
`:
`
` --------------------------------------------------------------------- X
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`
`
`No. 21-00123
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that I caused a copy of the foregoing COMPLAINT to be served by
`
`CM/ECF upon the following persons on this 24th day of March, 2021:
`
`DEFENDANT, THE UNITED STATES
`Attorney-in-charge
`International Trade Field Office
`Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division
`Room 346
`U.S. Department of Justice,
`26 Federal Plaza, Ste. 346
`New York, New York 10278
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Patrick B. Klein
`Patrick B. Klein
`Neville Peterson LLP
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket