Rail Coupler Exporter Drops Conflict-of-Interest Charges Across Multiple Cases Challenging ITC Injury Investigation
Importers and exporters led by Amsted Rail Co. stipulated the dismissal of one of their rail coupler cases and sought to amend their complaint in another Feb. 7 (Amsted Rail Co. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00242, -00268).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
Amsted sought dismissal of its conflict of interest case. In that case, it had claimed that an International Trade Commission affirmative injury determination was based on information one of Amsted’s own former attorneys gave petitioners, his new employers (see 2410300045).
The exporter also asked the court to remove one of the counts in its complaint for another case brought against the same proceeding (see 2312150065). That count, too, involved the former Amsted attorney, as it challenged ITC’s failure to disqualify the attorney “in connection with its investigation.”
“Plaintiffs made a final decision only in the last few days to drop Count One regarding the disqualification issue and is notifying the Court of this decision as promptly as possible,” Amsted said.