The Court of International Trade on Jan. 23 sustained the Commerce Department's finding that oil piping from Brunei and the Philippines circumvented the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on oil country tubular goods from China. Judge M. Miller Baker relied on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's ruling in Al Ghurair Iron & Steel v. U.S. to reject claims from exporters HLDS (B) Steel and HLD Clark Steel Pipe against Commerce's comparison of their production of oil pipe in Brunei and the Philippines to the production of hot-rolled steel, an oil piping input, in China. The Federal Circuit already found that Commerce can make the comparison because the agency indicated what part of the total value of the goods subject to the inquiries is accounted for by the last step of processing and found that the level of investment is much greater for the production of hot-rolled steel than for oil piping, Baker noted.
International trade attorney Lucas Queiroz Pires joined King & Spalding as an international trade associate after leaving Alston & Bird, he announced on LinkedIn. Pires will work on the government matters and international trade practices at King & Spalding.
Trade attorney Irwin Altschuler returned to Greenberg Traurig as a shareholder after working for three years at Mexican steel company Deacero, the firm announced. Altschuler is a member of the firm's international trade practice, based in Washington, D.C. He was with the firm for 16 years prior to joining Deacero and chaired the international trade practice.
International trade attorney Lindsay Meyer, co-chair of Venable's international trade group, has retired, according to a firm notice at the Court of International Trade. Meyer received her J.D. degree from the George Washington University Law School in 1987 and worked in international trade for over 30 years, covering trade remedies, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, and customs and homeland security matters. She also is a licensed customs broker.
The Court of International Trade on Jan. 19 granted a joint motion that results in duty-free treatment for swimsuits reimported by SGS Sports under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 9801.00.20. The ruling avoids a bench trial over whether the swimsuits qualify for the subheading as U.S. goods returned to the country.
Target Corp. told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that the U.S. failed to distinguish the court's opinion in Cemex v. U.S. from Target's case, in which the retail giant is contesting a court-ordered reliquidation of its entries that erroneously received a favorable antidumping duty rate. Target said that no "amount of legal legerdemain and reference to" distinguishable case law can "mask the vacuity of" the "attempted distinctions" (Target Corp. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-2274).
The Court of International Trade on Jan. 19 sustained the Commerce Department's use of exporter PhosAgro's profit before tax number instead of its gross profit mark when calculating the company's phosphate mining rights benefit.
Ilya Kahn, a citizen of the U.S., Russia and Israel, was arrested on Jan. 17 for allegedly aiding a scheme to illicitly ship sensitive technology from the U.S. to a sanctioned Russian business, DOJ announced. Kahn was charged in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California with conspiracy to violate the Export Control Reform Act.
The Supreme Court heard oral argument on Jan. 17 in a pair of cases contesting the Chevron doctrine, under which deference is afforded to executive agencies in interpreting federal laws where there is ambiguity. Many of the justices appeared primed to strike down the doctrine, including Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, Samuel Alito and John Roberts, who either criticized its use or questioned its current relevancy and impact (Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, Sup. Ct. # 22-451) (Relentless v. Dept. of Commerce, Sup. Ct. # 22-1219).
NEW YORK -- The Court of International Trade held oral argument on Jan. 18 in Chinese exporter Ninestar's case challenging its placement on the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act Entity List, addressing the company's motion for a preliminary injunction against its listing and its bid to unseal and unredact the record in the case (Ninestar Corp. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00182).