Surety firm American Alternative Insurance Corp. filed a cross-claim in a customs penalty suit brought by the U.S. against importer Repwire, its manager Jose Pigna and the surety. On Dec. 9, American Alternative Insurance told the Court of International Trade that Repwire and Pigna should be compelled to pay the over $13 million penalty and that the company and its manager "are obligated to indemnify" the insurance company for the amount of duties and fees being demanded (United States v. Repwire, CIT # 24-00173).

Importer Fine Emeralds will get refunds for duties paid on its rough, unworked emerald stones, the company announced in a stipulated judgment filed on Dec. 9 at the Court of International Trade. While the emeralds were assessed 10.5% duties under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 7103.10.40, the government agreed to classify the products under subheading 7103.10.20, free of duty. Fine Emeralds' preferred subheading covers uncorked precious stones (Fine Emeralds v. U.S., CIT # 20-03928).

Chinese-origin countertop importer Superior Commercial Solutions argued Dec. 6 it hadn’t waived its challenge to the CBP regulation that allows it to initiate Enforce and Protect Act investigations based on a petition’s “date of receipt,” which is determined by the agency (Superior Commercial Solutions v. United States, CIT # 24-00052).

Various U.S. manufacturers dropped a pair of cases at the Court of International Trade on Dec. 5, following the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's decision finding that the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000 doesn't require payouts of interest assessed after liquidation, known as delinquency interest, to affected domestic producers (see 2407150031). The appellate court said earlier this year that the act doesn't require delinquency interest payments but only payments of interest that's "earned" on antidumping and countervailing duties and "assessed" under the associated AD or CVD order. The two cases -- one led by Novolex, doing business as Hilex Poly Co. and the other by Bassett Furniture Industries -- had been stayed pending the outcome of the lead case (Bassett Furniture Industries v. U.S., CIT # 19-00073) (Novolex d/b/a Hilex Poly Co. v. U.S., CIT # 19-00074).

The U.S. opposed Canadian lumber exporters' bid to get the court to clarify its instruction to CBP to "discontinue ... the collection of" cash deposits made on entries brought in before a prior Court of International Trade decision, which said it wasn't equitable to subject the companies' exports to the countervailing duty order on Canadian softwood lumber (Committee Overseeing Action for Lumber International Trade Investigations or Negotiations v. United States, CIT # 19-00122).

Glycine producer Deer Park Glycine said Dec. 3 that the Court of International Trade does have jurisdiction under section 1581(c), or alternatively 1581(i), to hear its challenge of the Commerce Department’s rejection of Deer Park’s “duplicative” scope ruling request (Deer Park Glycine v. U.S., CIT # 24-00016).

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit on Dec. 6 upheld the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, which bans the social media application TikTok in the U.S. or forces its parent company, Chinese tech giant ByteDance, to divest its ownership share in the application in the U.S. Judges Douglas Ginsburg, Sri Srinivasan and Neomi Rao said the ban survived constitutional scrutiny (TikTok Inc. and ByteDance Ltd. v. Merrick Garland, D.D.C. # 24-1113).

Importer Incase Design Corp. settled four customs cases on its iPad or tablet covers, securing a 5.3% duty rate for the goods, which were originally assessed at 17.6%. Filing four stipulated judgments at the Court of International Trade, Incase said the U.S. agreed to liquidate the covers under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 3926.90.99 after originally liquidating the goods under subheading 4202.92.90. The importer will receive refunds for excess duties paid on its goods (Incase Design Corp. v. U.S., CIT #'s 14-00102, 14-00299, 15-00144, 16-00026).

Importer AM/NS Calvert and the U.S. settled the company's case challenging the rejection of its 12 requests for Section 232 steel tariff exclusions, the parties told the Court of International Trade on Dec. 4. Under the settlement, CBP will refund duties paid on 20 entries of the company's steel slab imports, and the company will abandon its claim for refunds on another 16 of its slab entries. The settlement came as the result of court-led mediation before Judge Leo Gordon. The parties said they reached an agreement in principle to settle the case in February, pending a review of Calvert's import data (see 2404120043) (AM/NS Calvert v. U.S., CIT # 21-00005).

An importer of dried seaweed brought a complaint Dec. 4 to the Court of International Trade challenging the reclassification of its seaweed “for the first time in 37 years” (Takaokaya USA v. United States, CIT # 24-00213).