The U.S. opposed Florida man Zhe "John" Liu's motion to amend the protective order in a customs penalty suit seemingly to allow Liu to review documents produced by the U.S. The government said the protective order doesn't need to be amended since it supplies the defendant with the "full ability to review the materials provided to him in discovery," adding that Liu "conjures a dilemma where none exists" and his reasoning appears to be pretextual for gaining evidence he isn't entitled to "under the governing criminal discovery rules" (U.S. v. Zhe "John" Liu, CIT # 22-00215).
The Commerce Department shouldn't have rejected a ministerial error comment submitted by The Ancientree Cabinet Co. that pointed out an incorrect dumping margin calculated by the agency, Ancientree said Jan. 5. The company called Commerce’s rejection “arbitrary and an abuse of discretion” (The Ancientree Cabinet Co. v. United States, CIT # 23-00262).
The Court of International Trade on Jan. 5 issued a confidential opinion sustaining the sixth antidumping duty review on steel nails from Oman. Oman Fasteners brought suit to contest the Commerce Department's use of adverse facts available against the exporter for supposedly failing to submit all of its responses to Commerce's supplemental questionnaire by the deadline (Oman Fasteners v. U.S., CIT # 22-00348).
The Commerce Department has not established an "irrebuttable presumption" of state control for exporters in nonmarket economies, antidumping duty petitioner the United Steelworkers labor union argued in a Jan. 5 reply brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Pirelli Tyre Co. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-2266).
Exporter SeAH Steel VINA Corp. filed a trio of complaints at the Court of International Trade on Jan. 5 to contest the Commerce Department's finding that pipes and tubes it exports from Vietnam, made using hot-rolled steel from China, South Korea and India, are circumventing antidumping duty orders on steel pipes from those three countries (SeAH Steel VINA Corp. v. U.S. , CIT # 23-00256, -00257, -00258).
Chris Pey, a trade lawyer formerly of FisherBroyles, is joining the new law firm Pierson Ferdinand, the new shop announced Jan. 2. He's joined by over 130 other FisherBroyles partners that made the jump to the new firm.
The U.S. swapped its principal counsel in an antidumping and countervailing duty scope case at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit concerning importer Siffron's plastic shelf dividers. In a notice of substitution Jan. 3, the government said Christopher Berridge, DOJ trial attorney in the Commercial Litigation Branch, will replace Daniel Roland. In the case, the Court of International Trade sustained the Commerce Department's exclusion of Siffron's dividers from the AD/CVD orders on raw flexible magnets from China (see 2309260049) (Magnum Magnetics Corp. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 24-1164).
The U.S. opposed importer 3BTech's motion to amend the scheduling order in a customs case, arguing that the company failed to show good cause for the amount of time requested.
Russian exporter JSC Apatit took to the Court of International Trade to contest the Commerce Department's 2020-21 administrative review of the countervailing duty order on phosphate fertilizers from Russia, in which it received a 28.5% CVD rate (Joint Stock Company Apatit v. U.S., CIT # 23-00254).
A less stringent "reasonable cause" standard for adding companies to the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act Entity List is justified on statutory and policy grounds, the U.S. told the Court of International Trade in a brief opposing Chinese exporter Ninestar Corp.'s motion for a preliminary injunction. Using a higher standard, such as a preponderance of the evidence standard, for making listing decisions, would undermine the UFLPA's goal of placing a burden on exporters to show that their goods are not made with forced labor (Ninestar Corp. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00182).