A Canadian resident convicted of trafficking in counterfeit goods was sentenced to serve 24 months in prison and ordered to pay $4.8 million in restitution, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Western District of New York announced.
Jacob Kopnick
Jacob Kopnick, Associate Editor, is a reporter for Trade Law Daily and its sister publications Export Compliance Daily and International Trade Today. He joined the Warren Communications News team in early 2021 covering a wide range of topics including trade-related court cases and export issues in Europe and Asia. Jacob's background is in trade policy, having spent time with both CSIS and USTR researching international trade and its complexities. Jacob is a graduate of the University of Michigan with a B.A. in Public Policy.
Trade Court Rejects US Steel's Requests to Redact Parts of Decision on Section 232 Exclusion Denials
The Court of International Trade rejected U.S. Steel Corp.'s bid to redact portions of the court's recent decision remanding 31 Section 232 exclusion requests. Judge M. Miller Baker said a showing of good cause alone isn't enough to shield discovery materials after they have been introduced at trial or submitted "in connection with dispositive motions," noting the need for transparency in the judicial system and presumption of public access to court proceedings.
The Commerce Department failed to consider whether U.S. Steel Corp. had the capacity to fill the aggregate of importer California Steel Industries' Section 232 steel tariff exclusion requests as opposed to just assessing whether U.S. Steel could fill all of them individually, the Court of International Trade held on Nov. 13. Judge M. Miller Baker added that Commerce didn't address its concession that it couldn't timely supply more slab than contracted for with California Steel.
In light of speculation about whether President-elect Donald Trump will use the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose sweeping tariffs on China, Mexico and Canada, observers are revisiting the lone decision in the history of U.S. case law reviewing emergency trade action: U.S. v. Yoshida International.
Two international trade attorneys at Wiley were elevated to partner, the firm announced Dec. 11: Elizabeth Lee, former associate in the international trade practice, and Enbar Toledano, former of counsel in the litigation practice. Lee covers trade remedy proceedings, while Toledano litigates appeals of administrative trade decisions, among other things. Their new status is effective Jan. 1.
The U.S. warned World Trade Organization members this week against adjudicating national security matters, saying in a communication that they should instead bring a "non-violation claim" that would allow for the rebalancing of trade concessions and avoid "dragging" members into debates over political issues.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Commerce Department erred in finding that respondent Habich and its U.S. sales agent aren't affiliated, as well as in its calculations of Habich's normal value based on its third-country sales to Mexico, petitioner Lumimove, doing business as WPC Technologies, argued. Filing a motion for judgment at the Court of International Trade on Dec. 5, WPC said Commerce's failure to further investigate the alleged affiliation between Habich and its U.S. sales agent amounted to a "dereliction of duty" (Lumimove, Inc., d/b/a WPC Technologies v. U.S., CIT # 24-00105).
The Court of International Trade on Dec. 12 remanded the 2021 countervailing duty review on cut-to-length carbon-quality steel plate from South Korea in a confidential decision. Judge Claire Kelly gave the parties until Dec. 16 to review the confidential information in the decision. The central issue in the case is the Commerce Department's finding of de facto specificity regarding the South Korean government's alleged provision of electricity for less than adequate remuneration (see 2408130046). Parties in the case also contest Commerce's refusal to accept the 2021 cost information from the state electricity company, KEPCO, as being untimely filed (Hyundai Steel Co. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00211).
The Commerce Department has the inherent authority to set procedural requirements in its antidumping duty and countervailing duty proceedings, making its revocation of certain AD orders lawful given that no interested domestic party filed a notice of intent to participate in sunset reviews on the orders, the agency said. Filing its opening brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Dec. 11, Commerce said the Court of International Trade's rejection of its action usurped the department's clear authority to fix its own procedures (Archroma U.S. v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 24-2159).