On Jan. 8, the U.S. moved to dismiss an importer’s claim contesting CBP's decision to liquidate nine of its picture frame moulding entries, saying the Court of International Trade lacks subject matter jurisdiction to hear the case because the liquidations were related to the importer's prior disclosure (Larson-Juhl US v. U.S., CIT # 23-00032).
The U.S. defended its right not to turn over parts of the administrative record in a case on the decision to add exporter Ninestar Corp. to the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act Entity List, saying that the record is protected by the "informer's privilege" or is "law-enforcement sensitive" (Ninestar Corp. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00182).
Judges at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit questioned the claim that the U.S.-Peru Trade Promotion Agreement bars a class-action lawsuit against U.S. companies and their officials. The suit, brought by Peruvian citizens, alleges that a mineral smelting and refining complex in Peru caused environmental damage, harming the individuals (Sr. Kate Reid v. The Doe Run Resources Corp., 8th Cir. # 23-1625).
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.
A Chinese aluminum foil exporter filed a complaint Jan. 8 at the Court of International Trade challenging the results of a 2021-2022 administrative review of the antidumping duty order covering their products (Jiangsu Dingsheng New Materials Joint-Stock Co. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00264).
The Court of International Trade on Jan. 8 opinion rejected a U.S. request to redact information in the court's recent opinion sustaining an International Trade Commission affirmative injury finding in antidumping and countervailing duty cases on mattresses.
The Commerce Department on remand altered its analysis on whether an additional allotment of traceable carbon emissions credits in South Korea constituted a financial contribution. Submitting remand results to the Court of International Trade on Jan. 5, Commerce said that the South Korean government's decision to distribute additional free allowances of carbon emissions credits constitutes a "direct transfer of funds," rather than revenue forgone by the foreign government (Hyundai Steel Co. v. U.S., CIT # 22-00170).
The U.S. Supreme Court again turned down the chance to review President Donald Trump's expansion of Section 232 steel and aluminum duties beyond procedural time limits, denying a petition for writ of certiorari by steel nail maker Oman Fasteners (Oman Fasteners v. U.S., Sup. Ct. # 23-432).
Tire Exporter's Challenge to Presumption of NME State Control Sunk by CAFC Case Law, Petitioner Says
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).