The Court of International Trade on Sept. 22 signed off on the settlement of a customs penalty suit the U.S. brought against importer Katana Racing. Under the settlement, Katana agreed to pay $2.35 million to resolve the case, which involved $5.8 million in unpaid duties and penalties related to the company's tire imports (see 2509050067) (U.S. v. Katana Racing, CIT # 19-00125).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Sept. 23 directed the Court of International Trade to transfer a certain physical exhibit to the appeals court in importer Cozy Comfort's customs case on the classification of its oversized pullover, The Comfy. Cozy moved the Federal Circuit without opposition to transfer a physical sample of The Comfy and its retail packaging to the court so the sample is "available for inspection by this Court and the parties at oral argument" (Cozy Comfort v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 25-1889).
CBP told the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Sept. 22 that communications between it and Apple didn't show that the agency coordinated with Apple to skirt a limited exclusion order (LEO) from the International Trade Commission that bars the importation of Apple Watch products that infringe Masimo's patents (Masimo v. U.S. Customs and Border Protection, D.D.C. # 25-02749).
The International Trade Commission "dodges" the substantive arguments made against its affirmative injury finding on Israeli brass rod and, instead, repeatedly asks the Court of International Trade to defer to its "flawed methodologies," the Israeli government's Ministry of Economy and Industry argued in a reply brief filed last week at the trade court (Government of Israel v. United States, CIT # 24-00197).
A total of seven amicus briefs were filed at the Supreme Court in defense of President Donald Trump's ability to impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. One of the briefs, filed by the America First Policy Institute, urged the Supreme Court to sustain Trump's IEEPA tariff action under Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930, while another, penned by University of Virginia law professor Aditya Bamzai, detailed how wartime powers have historically included the power to tax and argued that IEEPA should be read to include these powers (Donald J. Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, U.S. 25-250) (Learning Resources v. Donald J. Trump, U.S. 24-1287).
The Court of International Trade sustained the Commerce Department's second remand results in a case on the 2019 administrative review of the countervailing duty order on hot-rolled steel flat products from South Korea, in a confidential decision. Judge Mark Barnett gave the parties until Sept. 29 to review the confidential information in the decision. In the remand results, Commerce said the Korean government's full allotment of emissions permits under the Korean Emissions Trading System was de facto specific, switching its previous determination that the full allotment was de jure specific following a remand order from Barnett (see 2407310039). Opening the record on remand, the agency added new data to the record and, with this data, said 504 companies got the full 100% allotment of the permits and that over 787,000 companies operated in Korea in 2019, meaning the program can't be considered "widely used" throughout the economy (Hyundai Steel Co. v. United States, CIT # 22-00170).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit on Sept. 23 set aside part of the Federal Maritime Commission's rule limiting the parties against whom "demurrage and detention" fees may be assessed. Judges Sri Srinivasan, Robert Wilkins and J. Michelle Childs held that the commission arbitrarily and capriciously exempted motor carriers from being assessed these fees, given the FMC's "stated rationale" to confine fees to parties who are in a "contractual relationship with the billing party."
CBP failed to explain its finding that Dominican exporter Kingtom Aluminio made its aluminum extrusions with forced labor, the Court of International Trade held on Sept. 23. Vacating and remanding the forced labor finding, Judge Timothy Reif said the agency failed to "articulate a satisfactory explanation for its action” based on a “rational connection between the facts found and the choice made" in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act's arbitrary and capricious standard.
Four amicus briefs were filed at the Supreme Court on Sept. 23 in defense of President Donald Trump's ability to levy tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The briefs focused on various elements of the case, though they all argued that the nondelegation doctrine shouldn't be used to strip the president of his tariff authority here, since the court has long upheld broad delegations of authority to the president in the realms of foreign affairs and national defense (Donald J. Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, U.S. 25-250) (Learning Resources v. Donald J. Trump, U.S. 24-1287).
Two Chinese nationals were recently sentenced to lengthy prison sentences for importing fentanyl precursor chemicals and money laundering through Wuhan-based chemical manufacturer Amarvel Biotech, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York announced last week. Qingzhou Wang, who operated as Amarvel's principal executive, was sentenced Sept. 18 to 25 years in prison, while Yiyi Chen, the company's marketing manager, was sentenced last month to 15 years.