Nestle USA last week filed a motion opposing class certification in a lawsuit alleging that it "deceptively labels its chocolate as a sustainable, fair trade product" when its cocoa beans are allegedly farmed using child and trafficked labor in West Africa (Renee Walker v. Nestle USA, S.D. Cal. # 19-00723).
toSearch Primer
Term list: Separate terms with spaces, not commas or semicolons.
Multi-word term: Place inside quotes to ensure an exact match (e.g. "surrogate value").
Acronyms: Use all capital letters to ensure the search is not looking for that letter sequence instead. (e.g., CIT).
Required term: If a term must be included in any resulting articles, prefix it with a plus sign (e.g., CBP +ruling).
Excluded term: If a term should be excluded from any articles being found, prefix it with a minus sign (e.g., ruling -NY).
Simplest form: Use the simplest form of a term (e.g. "russian export control" instead of "russian export controls") or "entity list" instead of "entity listing" or "entity listed").
The U.S. and importer Siffron filed a pair of briefs at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit defending the Commerce Department's finding that Siffron's shelf dividers are outside the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on flexible magnets from China (Magnum Magnetics Corp. v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 24-1164).
The Solar Energy Industries Association argued that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit used the "right tools" of statutory construction to answer the "wrong question" of agency deference in sustaining President Donald Trump's revocation of a tariff exclusion for bifacial solar panels. Filing a response on Feb. 28 to the government's opposition to SEIA's rehearing en banc motion, the industry group said that the U.S. didn't dispute, and "thus concedes," that the Maple Leaf deferential standard is "deeply out of step" with the law set by the Supreme Court, CAFC and other circuit courts (Solar Energy Industries Association v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 22-1392).
The Court of International Trade in a decision made public Feb. 29 rejected Chinese printer cartridge exporter Ninestar Corp.'s motion for a preliminary injunction against its designation on the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act Entity List. Judge Gary Katzmann said the company was unlikely to succeed on the merits of its claims, failed to show that it would suffer irreparable harm absent the injunction and that the balance of equities and public interest favored the government.
Forty-eight World Trade Organization members adopted a "comprehensive plan" at the 13th Ministerial Conference to try to phase out or eliminate harmful fossil fuel subsidies, the WTO announced Feb. 27. The members, including countries in South America, Europe and the Pacific Islands, hope to make progress on the effort this year and next ahead of the next ministerial conference, the WTO said. The effort, called the Fossil Fuel Subsidy Reform initiative, aims to boost transparency surrounding fossil fuel subsidies, "tackle crisis support measures," and identify key fossil fuel subsidy types and different ways to "reform, reduce and eliminate them."
The EU General Court last week rejected Belarusian nitrogen compound producer Grodno Azot's application for delisting from the EU's sanctions regime on Belarus.
Marcus Nussbaum settled an attorney misconduct proceeding before the Federal Maritime Commission earlier this month, agreeing not to practice before the FMC for one year. If Nussbaum tries to practice before the commission before the one-year period or violates the settlement agreement, the FMC said it may "re-institute" the misconduct proceeding.
The following lawsuits have been filed recently at the Court of International Trade:
The Solar Energy Industries Association asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Feb. 23 for leave to file a "short reply in support of their pending petition for rehearing en banc" in a suit on President Donald Trump's revocation of a tariff exclusion for bifacial solar panels (Solar Energy Industries Association v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 22-1392).
Various solar cell exporters and importers defended their right to intervene in a Court of International Trade lawsuit on the Commerce Department's pause of antidumping and countervailing duties on solar cells and modules from Southeast Asian nations found to be circumventing the AD/CVD orders on these goods from China. Filing a pair of reply briefs, the exporters and importers said they have the right to intervene since they have an "interest in the property or transaction at issue" (Auxin Solar v. United States, CIT # 23-00274).