Petitioner Aluminum Association Trade Enforcement Working Group told the Court of International Trade on May 20 that it would be making arguments in its aluminum foil case on the basis of the recently decided solar cell cases (see 2505160045, 2505190059 and 2505190054) (Hanon Systems Alabama Corp. v. United States, CIT # 24-00013).

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on May 23 extended a stay in an antidumping duty case after the Court of International Trade settled a related lawsuit. Judge Timothy Dyk noted that the parties told the court that, if no party files an appeal in the related case, the present case before CAFC will be withdrawn. As a result, Dyk extended the stay and said the parties have until seven days after June 16 to tell the court how they plan to proceed (Bioparques de Occidente v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-2109).

Steel wire importer Deacero filed a motion for judgment May 19 saying the Commerce Department’s circumvention finding regarding its prestressed concrete steel wire (PC) strand, made under Section 781(a), represents a dangerous precedent that would let Commerce impose duties on all intermediate steel products and “endanger investment” in U.S. manufacturing (Deacero v. United States, CIT # 24-00212).

The following lawsuit was filed recently at the Court of International Trade:

A trade group that requested antidumping and countervailing duties on glass wine bottles brought a 27-count complaint to the Court of International Trade on May 21. The petitioner challenged the International Trade Commission’s determination that bottle imports weren’t harming the domestic industry (U.S. Glass Producers Coalition v. United States, CIT # 25-00076).

The U.S. filed a May 19 supplemental brief in a 2021 case involving dual-stenciled pipe from Thailand to address the case’s last “remaining contention” after the importer lost in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Blue Pipe Steel Center Co., Ltd. v. United States, CIT # 21-00081).

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on May 23 denied a petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc in an antidumping duty scope case filed by importers Smith-Cooper International and Sigma. Judges Kimberly Moore, Haldane Mayer, Alan Lourie, Timothy Dyk, Sharon Prost, Jimmie Reyna, Richard Taranto, Raymond Chen, Todd Hughes, Kara Stoll, Tiffany Cunningham and Leonard Stark denied the petition (Vandewater International v. United States, Fed. Cir. #s 23-1093, -1141).

In a May 20 amicus curiae brief for California’s challenge of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act tariffs, NYU’s Brennan Center laid out the legislative history of IEEPA, arguing it doesn’t support a ruling that the law was meant to grant the president tariff powers (State of California v. Donald J. Trump, N.D. Cal. # 3:25-03372).

The Court of International Trade on May 23 assigned a case challenging the elimination of the de minimis threshold on goods from China to Judges Gary Katzmann, Timothy Reif and Jane Restani. The court has assigned these same three judges to all cases challenging President Donald Trump's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose tariffs.

Letex Apparels, a Hong Kong trading company, filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California alleging that CBP negligently seized or forfeited 26,016 of the company's imported garments valued at $460,743.36. The company argued that, in handling its merchandise, CBP failed to "exercise due care" in handling the goods and violated the company's Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable seizure, the Administrative Procedure Act and a federal rule of criminal procedure requiring the return of property held by the government that isn't needed for evidentiary purposes (Letex Apparels Co. v. United States, C.D. Cal. # 2:25-04462).