International trade attorney Moushami Joshi has joined Husch Blackwell as senior counsel, Joshi announced on LinkedIn. She joins the firm from Pillsbury Winthrop, where she worked as an attorney for over 10 years. Prior to working at Pillsbury in Washington, Joshi worked as an international trade partner at L&L Partners in India.
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.
The Pentagon defended its decision to designate Chinese lidar company Hesai Technology as a Chinese military company, filing a cross-motion for judgment in Hesai's case against its designation at the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (see 2412110023). DOD said substantial evidence backs its finding that Hesai is a "military-civil fusion contributor to the Chinese defense industrial base," arguing that Hesai failed to appreciate that the "combined weight" of all the evidence supports the designation (Hesai Technology Co. v. United States, D.D.C. # 24-01381).
The Commerce Department erred in using adverse facts available related to exporter The Ancientree Cabinet Co.'s alleged receipt of benefits from China's Export Buyer's Credit Program, Ancientree argued in a Jan. 13 complaint at the Court of International Trade. Ancientree said it demonstrated that neither it nor its U.S. customers used the EBCP (The Ancientree Cabinet Co. v. United States, CIT # 24-00223).
Various exporters led by Jiangsu Dingsheng New Materials Joint-Stock Co. challenged the Commerce Department's antidumping and countervailing duty reviews on aluminum foil from China at the Court of International Trade (Hangzhou Five Star Aluminum Co. v. United States, CIT # 24-00231) (Jiangsu Dingsheng New Materials Joint-Stock Co. v. United States, CIT # 24-00228).
Nine different companies filed a total of 18 nearly identical complaints at the Court of International Trade on Jan. 13 contesting the Commerce Department's antidumping and countervailing duty investigations on aluminum extrusions from China. All the cases contest a part of Commerce's final scope decision in the proceedings, which found that the agency had the "legal authority to include within the scope of investigation, and did in fact include, 'inputs' to imported merchandise, as opposed to the actual imported merchandise itself" (Daikin Comfort Technologies Manufacturing v. United States, CIT #s 24-00250, -252).
A World Trade Organization dispute panel on Jan. 10 delivered a mixed ruling in Indonesia's dispute against various measures imposed by the EU and its member states on palm oil and oil palm crop-based biofuels from Indonesia. The European Commission touted the ruling as a win, declaring in a press release that the panel "confirmed the overall WTO compatibility" of its "Renewable Energy Directive" legal framework.
An indictment was unsealed on Jan. 7 charging three Russian nationals for their role in a scheme to operate the "cryptocurrency mixing services" Blender.io and Sinbad.io, both of which have been sanctioned by the Office of Foreign Assets Control, DOJ announced.
DOJ entered into a deal to send around $52.88 million in forfeited assets to Nigeria "in recognition of Nigeria's assistance" in an investigation into corruption in the Nigerian oil industry, DOJ announced.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
CBP reversed its finding that importer Zinus evaded the antidumping duty order on wooden bedroom furniture from China on remand at the Court of International Trade. CBP made the decision after incorporating a scope ruling from the Commerce Department finding that seven models of metal and wood platform beds imported by Zinus aren't covered by the AD order (Zinus v. United States, CIT # 23-00272).