The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:

An Indian frozen shrimp exporter responded May 14 to opposition (see 2404160042) against its motion for judgment (see 2402080060) in a case regarding the results of an antidumping duty review, saying that the Commerce Department and petitioners had focused on the wrong arguments and failed to address key evidence (Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Committee v U.S., CIT Consol. # 23-00202).

A pair of exporters shouldn't be allowed to pluck "a few words out of context without examining the full language of that scope" in their challenge to a Commerce Department ruling that steel truck wheels made in Thailand with either Chinese-origin rims or discs are subject to the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on steel wheels from China (Asia Wheel Co. v. United States, CIT Consol. # 23-00143).

Seneca Foods Corporation May 13 opposed a motion by DOJ for an extension of time to file a reply to its comments on remand, saying the department had failed to show good cause (Seneca Foods Corp. v. U.S., CIT # 22-00243).

Tire exporters YC Rubber Co. and Sutong Tire Resources alerted the Court of International Trade to a separate CIT decision affirming the Commerce Department's finding that the mandatory respondent in an antidumping duty review remained eligible for a separate rate "despite its unwilligness to participate in the administrative review" (YC Rubber Co. (North America) v. United States, CIT # 19-00069).

An exporter of frozen fish fillets from Vietnam brought a case to court contesting the 2021-2022 antidumping review on its products. In its complaint, it said the Commerce Department had wrongly denied it byproduct offsets for “fresh broken meat” and “fresh fish waste by-products” and illegally liquidated some of its entries at the “punitive” Vietnam-wide rate instead of its own, lower, separate rate (Can Tho Import Export Seafood Joint Stock Company v. U.S., CIT # 24-00080).

The International Trade Commission did not properly investigate the actual feasibility or frequency of reshipping excess phosphate fertilizer during a year in which fertilizer supply chains were rocked by unusual events, foreign exporters and domestic importers told the Court of International Trade May 8 in comments opposing a continued affirmative injury finding by the ITC after a remand (OCP v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 21-00219).

The U.S. on May 13 moved to dismiss a lawsuit challenging CBP's exclusion of two rubber tire entries, claiming that CIT has no jurisdiction because the entries were excluded at the behest of the Transportation Department's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). As a result, the exclusions were not protestable decisions made by CBP, so the Court of International Trade had no subject matter jurisdiction under Section 1581(a) (Inspired Ventures v. United States, CIT # 24-00062).

DOJ accidentally included confidential business and personal information for unrelated cases in an October filing due to a glitch in CBP's Automated Commercial Environment (ACE), the agency said May 10 in a letter to the Court of International Trade (Suprajit Controls v. U.S., CIT # 23-00181).

Conservation groups Sea Shepherd New Zealand and Sea Shepherd Conservation Society asked the Court of International Trade on May 10 for another 30 days to settle the final issues in a case ultimately seeking an import ban on certain types of fish from New Zealand. The conservation groups said they sent the U.S. an offer to settle the matter of the groups' "claim for fees and costs in this case," and that DOJ is reviewing the offer under the agency's regulations (Sea Shepherd New Zealand v. United States, CIT # 20-00112).