- with readers working within the Technology and Retail & Leisure industries
- within Coronavirus (COVID-19) and Law Department Performance topic(s)
Dominican Republic-based aluminum extrusions exporter,Kingtom Aluminio SRL (Kingtom) defended a decision issued by the Court of International Trade (CIT) to vacate a forced labor Finding against Kingtom issued by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). On October 31, 2025, Kingtom filed in opposition to the U.S. government's motion for a reconsideration of the decision to vacate the Finding.
For background, CBP issued a forced labor Finding against Kingtom in December 2024. Following an investigation, CBP determined that certain aluminum extrusions, profile products and derivatives from Kingtom were manufactured or produced in whole or in part with forced labor. CBP further determined that these products are being, or likely to be, imported into the U.S.
CBP's Finding against Kingtom is significant because it is the first direct Finding issued by CBP. Typically, CBP issues a Withhold Release Order (WRO) prior to the issuance of a Finding, since the threshold to issue a WRO is lower. The threshold for a WRO is met when CBP has reasonable suspicion to believe that the manufacturing or production process for certain goods involved forced labor. When there is probable cause that the goods are manufactured or produced by forced labor, CBP typically elevates the status of a WRO to a Finding. A Finding allows CBP to seize the imported goods at all U.S. ports of entry.
In September 2025, the CIT found that CBP's Finding against Kingtom was arbitrary and capricious, in part because the public record did not provide substantial evidence supporting the Finding. The CIT then issued a decision to vacate and remand the Finding. In response, the U.S. government filed a motion requesting the CIT to reconsider its decision. The U.S. government argued, among other points, that the confidential record adequately supports the Finding.
Kingtom responded to the motion, defending the CIT's decision and stating that CBP did not provide Kingtom advance notice of the investigation and "skipped over the normal regulatory progression" of beginning with a WRO, then proceeding to a conclusive Finding. The ongoing litigation in this case highlights the likelihood that CBP will need to provide more substantive justification for any direct Findings, and raises doubts about whether CBP will continue to issue direct Findings in the future without first issuing a WRO.
Crowell continues to monitor developments in the Forced Labor space and their impact on industry.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
