On September 16, 2010, the CIT issued its decision in United States v. Pressman-Gutman Co., dismissing CBP’s claim that Pressman-Gutman breached the terms of its customs bond by failing to redeliver the imported goods in question. The case arose from a classification dispute over two 1999 entries of textile fabrics. After each entry was made, CBP requested samples of the goods as part of its routine classification analysis. Pressman-Gutman complied with the requests. Nearly four months after the first entry and three months after the second entry, CBP demanded redelivery of the goods. Pressman-Gutman was unable to redeliver the merchandise because it had already been delivered to its customers, and it refused to pay the liquidated damages assessed by CBP on the basis that CBP’s demands for redelivery were untimely.

In rejecting CBP’s claim, the CIT held that “[t]he Government has no colorable claim here. This is an action that never should have been brought; and the motions to dismiss it now must be granted.” The Court found that CBP’s case did not conform with federal regulations requiring CBP to make redelivery demands within 30 days of the end of the “conditional release period,” and that it contradicted 20 years of CBP rulings.