US to Reconsider Rejection of WRO Modification Petition on Voluntary Remand at CIT
The Court of International Trade on May 14 granted the government's bid for a voluntary remand in exporter Hoshine Silicon (Jia Xiang) Industry Co.'s case against a withhold release order on silica-based products made by its parent company, Hoshine Silicon, or its subsidiaries. The U.S. asked for the remand to reconsider Jiaxing Hoshine's original petition to revoke or modify the WRO and allow the exporter to submit additional evidence to the record (Hoshine Silicon (Jia Xing) Industry Co. v. United States, CIT # 24-00048).
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.
The WRO was issued in 2021 on the grounds that Hoshine and its subsidiaries make silica-based products with forced labor. Jiaxing Hoshine brought the case to challenge the issuance of the WRO and CBP's refusal to modify the order to specifically exclude the company (see 2402210045). Recently, the trade court rejected the government's attempt to dismiss the case, finding that Jiaxing Hoshine has constitutional and statutory standing to challenge CBP's decision not to revoke or modify the WRO (see 2504220056).
Following this decision, the U.S. asked for a voluntary remand. The government said it agreed with Jiaxing Hoshine to follow four parameters governing the remand: CBP will review evidence supplied in the company's original submission; Hoshine can submit additional information; CBP can issue questions regarding the original and new evidence and give the company a reasonable time to repsond; and CBP will issue a new decision on the WRO petition.
The government said a remand "will provide the agency the opportunity to reconsider its position and its decision, in light of a full airing of the parties’ views on the modification request." If needed, "the parties will be in a better position to litigate the remand decision, and the Court will be in a better position to evaluate that decision and the support for that decision." Judge Claire Kelly granted the remand request.