United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________

UNITED STATES, Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

KATANA RACING, INC., DBA WHEEL & TIRE DISTRIBUTORS, Defendant-Appellee ______________________

2022-1832 ______________________

Appeal from the United States Court of International Trade in No. 1:19-cv-00125-TJA, Senior Judge Thomas J. Aquilino, Jr. ______________________

Decided: August 3, 2023 ______________________

EMMA EATON BOND, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Wash- ington, DC, argued for plaintiff-appellant. Also repre- sented by BRIAN M. BOYNTON, TARA K. HOGAN, PATRICIA M. MCCARTHY.

PRATIK A. SHAH, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP, Washington, DC, argued for defendant-appellee. Also represented by PATRICK KLEIN, JOHN M. PETERSON, Neville Peterson LLP, New York, NY; RICHARD F. O’NEILL, Seattle, WA. Case: 22-1832 Document: 45 Page: 2 Filed: 08/03/2023

2 US v. KATANA RACING, INC.

______________________

Before PROST, SCHALL, and HUGHES, Circuit Judges. SCHALL, Circuit Judge. On July 15, 2019, the United States brought an action in the United States Court of International Trade against Katana Racing, Inc. (“Katana”). In that action, the govern- ment sought to recover unpaid customs duties and fees pur- suant to the Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. § 1592(d). J.A. 89–94. Instead of answering the complaint, on August 30, 2019, Katana filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to United States Court of International Trade Rule (“CIT Rule”) 12(b). Among other things, Katana asserted that the com- plaint should be dismissed pursuant to CIT Rule 12(b)(1) for lack of jurisdiction because the government had filed suit after the statute of limitations set forth at 19 U.S.C. § 1621 had run. Katana stated that, although it had signed a waiver of the statute of limitations on October 25, 2016, it had revoked the waiver prior to the expiration of the lim- itations period. J.A. 242–45. In a decision dated March 28, 2022, the Court of International Trade found that Katana had properly revoked its October 25, 2016 waiver of the statute of limitations. As a result, the court held that the government’s suit was untimely, and it dismissed the suit pursuant to CIT Rule 12(b)(1) for lack of jurisdiction. United States v. Katana Racing, Inc., 569 F. Supp. 3d 1296, 1314 (Ct. Int’l Trade 2022). The government now appeals. For the reasons set forth below, we hold that the Court of International Trade erred in dismissing the government’s suit for lack of jurisdiction. We therefore reverse the court’s decision and remand the case to the court for further proceedings. Case: 22-1832 Document: 45 Page: 3 Filed: 08/03/2023

US v. KATANA RACING, INC. 3

BACKGROUND I The facts pertinent to this appeal are set forth in the government’s complaint. See Bioparques de Occidente, S.A. de C.V. v. United States, 31 F.4th 1336, 1343 (Fed. Cir. 2022) (“At the motion to dismiss stage, we ‘must accept well-pleaded factual allegations as true and must draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the claimant.’” (quoting Hutchison Quality Furniture, Inc. v. United States, 827 F.3d 1355, 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2016))). Katana, a California-based distributor of high-end wheels and tires, was the importer of record for 386 entries of passenger vehicle and light truck tires from China be- tween November 24, 2009, and August 7, 2012. J.A. 89– 91. For those 386 entries, Katana supplied U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“Customs” or “CBP”) with