CIT Issues Classification Neither Party Advocated

May 7, 2025
By: Hannah B. Kreinik

In a recently published opinion, the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) reminded the trade world that classification is a question of law, which the court has the power to decide independent of the arguments of the parties. In specific, the court decided that SCR catalyst blocks (SCR blocks) are parts under 8421.99.00.

The SCR blocks in question were used in the SCR catalyst system to change toxic and ammonia into safe nitrogen and water. Plaintiff argued that the SCR blocks should be classified under 3815.19.00, "Reaction initiators, reaction accelerators and catalytic preparations, not elsewhere specified or included: Supported catalysts: Other." The United States argued that the SCR blocks were properly classified under 8421.39.80, "Centrifuges, including centrifugal dryers; filtering or purifying machinery and apparatus, for liquids or gases; parts thereof: Filtering or purifying machinery and apparatus for gases: Other."

Highlighting an underappreciated litigation risk, the court determined that both provisions advocated by the parties were inaccurate and that the SCR blocks were classified correctly as parts of the SCR catalyst system under 8421.99. The CIT clarified that the SCR blocks are used in a greater system, cannot stand independently to produce the necessary result, and is not designed for a specific use, such as purifying gas, and is therefore a "part" of the broader system. In some sense, this was likely still a victory for the government, since the new provision remains subject to Section 301 duties.

The more important element of the case is the court’s decision to reach the “correct” decision different from either provision advocated by the parties. With classification and origin having higher stakes than ever, litigants also need to worry that the court could reach a conclusion worse than the United States did (for the plaintiff). It’s always been the case that the court had the responsibility to find the correct classification, but this timely reminder is . . . timely.

Don't hesitate to contact any Barnes, Richardson & Colburn attorney with questions about your products and parts of the articles.