The Court of International Trade on Feb. 20 consolidated nine cases challenging the Commerce Department's scope determination in the antidumping duty investigation on aluminum extrusions from China and nine cases challenging the scope determination in the countervailing duty investigation on the same products. The court also stayed the consolidated cases pending the trade court's first decision in a separate case on the International Trade Commission's injury determination on the products (Dorman Products v. United States, CIT #s 24-00236, -00237).
Dominican exporter Kingtom Aluminio asked the Court of International Trade to expedite its challenge to CBP's finding that the company makes aluminum extrusions using forced labor, arguing that there's a "very real possibility" the company will have to "cease operations and file for bankruptcy as a result of" the forced labor finding (Kingtom Aluminio v. United States, CIT # 24-00264).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Feb. 20 allowed patent attorney Andrew Dhuey to appear as amicus curiae to defend Court of International Trade Judge Stephen Vaden's decision rejecting an unopposed motion to redact certain confidential information from the merits decision on an antidumping duty and countervailing duty injury determination. CAFC Judge Leonard Stark took up Dhuey on his offer, appointing him "in support" of the trade court's decision (In Re United States, Fed. Cir. # 24-1566).
President Donald Trump's directive in his proclamation expanding Section 232 steel tariffs to assess penalties for the misclassification of entries resulting in non-payment of the duties without regard for "evidence of mitigating factors" may run afoul of existing customs laws, trade lawyers said. Even if the directive stays within the bounds of the current statutory scheme, expect more prior disclosures and proactive steps to ensure the proper customs treatment of steel entries, the lawyers added.
Taiwan formally accepted the World Trade Organization Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies Feb. 18, bringing the number of countries that have accepted the deal to 90. The WTO needs 21 more countries to accept to get to two-thirds of the membership, the threshold for the agreement to take effect.
The U.S.District Court for the Eastern District of Texas stayed its preliminary injunction against the enforcement of the Corporate Transparency Act's (CTA's) beneficial ownership information reporting requirements after the Supreme Court granted a stay of a similar injunction in another case against the requirements. Judge Jeremy Kernodle lifted the preliminary injunction, citing the high court's decision (Smith v. U.S. Department of Treasury, E.D. Tex. # 6:24-336).
The Court of International Trade's Pay.gov system will be undergoing maintenance on Feb. 22 from 6 p.m. to 10 p.m. EST, the court announced. Documents requiring payment on Pay.gov can't be filed on CM/ECF during this time, the court said.
The International Trade Commission erred in failing to consider diesel fuel price increases when assessing whether imports of frozen warmwater shrimp from Ecuador, India, Indonesia and Vietnam harmed the U.S. industry, Ecuadorian respondents Industrial Pesquera Santa Priscila and Sociedad Nacional De Galapagos argued. Filing a complaint at the Court of International Trade on Feb. 18, the pair said the injury finding was unsupported by the record, due to the lack of information about fuel price increases (Industrial Pesquera Santa Priscila v. United States, CIT # 25-00029).
Two Ecuadorian exporters challenged the Commerce Department's countervailing duty investigation on frozen warmwater shrimp from Ecuador, arguing, among other things, that the agency erred in finding that certain tax benefits were de facto specific and in applying adverse facts available for specific subsidy programs. Respondent Industrial Pesquera Santa Priscila challenges its final 3.57% CVD rate, while respondent Sociedad Nacional De Galapagos (SONGA) challenges its 4.41% CVD rate (Industrial Pesquera Santa Priscila v. United States, CIT # 25-00025).
The inaugural use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose tariffs, which saw President Donald Trump set a 10% duty on all goods from China (see 2502030044), has sparked plenty of speculation as to how these tariffs could be challenged in court. One such argument is a statutory claim rooted in the text of IEEPA.