Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week, in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.

The Court of International Trade affirmed Aug. 11 the Commerce Department’s decision to, in an antidumping duty administrative review, reject Chinese solar cell exporter Yingli China’s separate rate application even though its U.S. sales were conducted through an affiliate, Yingli Green Energy Americas, with separate ownership.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Aug. 19 affirmed the Commerce Department’s decision to reject an exporter’s response to a separate rate questionnaire that had already been rescinded.

Importers' argument that the tariffs imposed using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act don't arise out of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the U.S. "strains the statutory text past the breaking point," the government argued in a reply brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (Learning Resources v. Donald J. Trump, D.C. Cir. # 25-5202).

The Commerce Department's failure to investigate and attribute subsidies received by respondent Antiqa Minerals' cross-owned affiliates and their suppliers in a countervailing duty investigation was unlawful, petitioner The Coalition for Fair Trade in Ceramic Tile argued in an Aug. 15 complaint at the Court of International Trade. Challenging the CVD investigation on ceramic tile from India, the coalition said Commerce's cross-ownership analysis of Antiqa was unsupported by substantial evidence (The Coalition for Fair Trade in Ceramic Tile v. United States, CIT # 25-00152).

The International Trade Commission urges an approach to the redaction of business proprietary information that "the law forbids," Alex Moss, executive director of the Public Interest Patent Law Institute, said in an Aug. 13 amicus brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a case on the commission's redaction policy. Moss said the ITC unlawfully asks the court to "redact judicial records at its request without requiring any justification" (In Re United States, Fed. Cir. #s 24-1566, 25-127).

CBP improperly interpreted the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on oil country tubular goods (OCTG) from China when it found that 10 importers evaded the orders, importer LE Commodities argued in an Aug. 13 complaint at the Court of International Trade. During the evasion proceeding, CBP said that the China-origin hollow steel billets used by Thai manufacturer Petroleum Equipment (Thailand) Co. to make the subject OCTG were "unfinished OCTG" subject to the orders (LE Commodities v. United States, CIT # 25-00181).

The five importers challenging the legality of President Donald Trump's tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act said there's "no basis" for the claim that there's "no substitute" for the IEEPA tariffs and recent trade deals Trump has made (V.O.S. Selections v. Donald J. Trump, Fed. Cir. # 25-1813)

Target General Merchandise's string light models are properly classified under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 9405 as lamps with a "permanently fixed light source" not specified elsewhere in the tariff schedule and not under heading 8543 as parts of electrical machines having individual functions not specified elsewhere in the chapter, the Court of International Trade held on Aug. 13. Judge Lisa Wang ruled that Target's seven models of string lights specifically fall under subheading 9405.30.00 as lighting sets "of a kind used for Christmas trees.”

Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week, in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.