The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Boutique law firm Fick & Marx filed suit against Joseph Baptiste, a defendant in a previous Foreign Corrupt Practices Act case, for breach of contract since he has allegedly failed to pay the firm for services rendered on his behalf in the FCPA case. Taking to the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, the firm said that Baptiste has "repeatedly promised to pay" his tab, which now amounts to over $160,000, but has failed to do so even over a year later (Fick & Marx v. Joseph Baptiste, D. Mass. # 23-12097).
Groups of exporters and importers filed complaints in 19 separate cases this week challenging the Commerce Department's anti-circumvention inquiry concerning the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on hardwood plywood products from China covering exports from Vietnam.
The Commerce Department properly used the Turkish lira to value exporter Habas Sinai ve Tibbi Gazlar Istihsal Endustrisi's home-market sales as part of the 2018-19 review of the antidumping duty order on cold-rolled steel flat products from Turkey, the Court of International Trade ruled in a Sept. 14 opinion. Judge M. Miller Baker said Commerce's use of the lira didn't violate its past practice or the established reasons underlying this practice.
The Commerce Department must consider evidence on remand regarding the control antidumping duty respondent Shanghai Tainai could have exerted over its suppliers before the agency hits the company with partial adverse facts available, the Court of International Trade ruled. Issuing the Sept. 14 opinion in a case on the 2019-20 review of the AD order on tapered roller bearings from China, Judge Stephen Vaden said Commerce failed to consider the factors set by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in using AFA on a fully cooperative respondent that "lacks the ability to control its suppliers."
The U.S. should push World Trade Organization members to "revisit what constitutes good and bad subsidies," which may help encourage transparency and improve "enforcement through incentives for compliance and penalties for noncompliance," the Council on Foreign Relations said in a new report.
The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Court of International Trade isn't "statutorily barred from granting" importer PrimeSource Building Products' request for a court order stopping CBP from collecting Section 232 steel and aluminum duties from the importer, PrimeSource said in a Sept. 12 reply brief. Addressing the government's claim that the trade court lacks the authority to grant the partial stay, the importer said the request, which seeks a stay pending the U.S. Supreme Court's resolution of the case challenging the expansion of Section 232 duties to cover "derivative" products, seeks relief from CIT and not the appellate court (PrimeSource Building Products v. U.S., CIT # 20-00032).
The Commerce Department illegally assigned adverse facts available to Vietnamese hardwood plywood producers for alleged "deficiencies, inconsistencies and/or contradictions in their responses," as part of an antidumping and countervailing duty anti-circumvention proceeding, importer USPLY said in a Sept. 13 complaint at the Court of International Trade. Commerce failed to tell the Vietnamese producers of these supposed consistencies or give them an opportunity to rebut them, the importer argued (USPLY v. United States, CIT # 23-0156).
Zulaika Mayfield of San Francisco filed a class-action lawsuit against aluminum foil maker Reynolds Consumer Products accusing the company of falsely claiming its goods are "Made in U.S.A." Filing suit at the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Mayfield said Reynolds' false representations violate California's Unfair Competition Law, False Advertising Law and Consumer Legal Remedies Act (Zulaika Mayfield v. Reynolds Consumer Products, N.D. Cal. # 3:23-04587).