Thank you for the enlightenment. My original focus was the line in the article that said India said they were shipped legally.
To me, that should have been the end of the story. I see it is not, however.
The problem is that this entire thing is much too complicated to be explained in a soundbite or a 250-word article.
The fact that it's complicated doesn't mean the deal was illegal (although mislabeling is illegal under the Lacey Act) - but it does show things in a different light than simply saying "the wood was shipped legally and Fish and Wildlife says that it wasn't." Plus - Theodor Nagel GmbH was involved in this import transaction. Nagel was falsely identified as the consignee on this shipment (LMI had earlier paperwork indicating Gibson was the consignee, but submitted paperwork naming Nagel, then, when the shipment was stopped for lack of a Lacey Act declaration, the general manager of LMI, Natalie Swango, told the Fish and Wildlife Agents that Gibson was the consignee and provided a copy of the earlier, unfiled paperwork), and the owners of Nagel also own Luthier Mercantile.
Nagel was involved in the 2009 illegal importation of Madagascar ebony and is almost certainly a target of the criminal investigation that the Environmental Crimes section of the Department of Justice has underway.
On the wood that came through Canada, LMI named itself as the final consignee - but emailed the warehouse to ignore the customs paperwork and stated that Gibson was the final consignee.
Most of this is in the affidavit I linked; a few details are in the pleadings that have been filed in the civil forfeiture lawsuit.