A wood board importer filed for summary judgment Jan. 26 challenging an August 2023 scope ruling that found the company’s edge-glued boards intended for making cabinets were subject to the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on wood mouldings and millwork products from China (Hardware Resources v. U.S., CIT # 23-00150).

Various importers and exporters are looking to intervene in a suit from solar cell maker Auxin Solar and solar module designer Concept Clean Energy challenging the Commerce Department's pause of antidumping and countervailing duties on solar cells and modules from Southeast Asian countries found to be circumventing the AD/CVD orders on these goods from China (Auxin Solar v. United States, CIT # 23-00274).

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

A steelmaker petitioner opposed the results of the Commerce Department’s second remand in a case challenging the results of a 2018 administrative review on South Korean carbon and alloy steel cut-to-length plate, saying that Commerce didn’t explain why the petitioner hadn’t provided enough evidence to prompt the agency to examine a particular subsidy (Nucor v. U.S., CIT # 21-00182).

Court of International Trade Judge Timothy Reif heard oral argument Jan. 18 in a case concerning the 2019 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on mattresses from Vietnam. Parties discussed the Commerce Department’s reliance on incomplete records and public access to a surrogate’s financial information (Ashley Furniture Industries v. U.S., CIT # 21-00283).

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Jan. 26 granted the U.S. request for a voluntary remand in an Enforce and Protect Act case led by American Pacific Plywood to address the Federal Circuit's holding in Royal Brush Manufacturing v. U.S. In that decision, the appellate court said CBP violated an EAPA respondent's due process rights by not providing it with access to confidential business information in the investigation (American Pacific Plywood v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-2321).

DOJ’s motion to bar a wristwatch exporter from using a late discovery production in any subsequent proceedings, or alternatively to reopen discovery, is just an “illusory claim” because no new information has actually surfaced, the exporter argued Jan. 24 at the Court of International Trade (Ildico Inc. v. U.S., CIT # 18-00136).

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Jan. 25 granted the U.S. government's unopposed motion to voluntarily remand an Enforce and Protect Act case to consider the appellate court's ruling in Royal Brush Manufacturing v. U.S. In Royal Brush, the Federal Circuit said CBP violated an EAPA respondent's due process rights by failing to provide it access to the business confidential information in the proceeding (Skyview Cabinet USA v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-2318).

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

The Court of International Trade asked parties in nine cases challenging the Commerce Department's circumvention investigation on solar cells from Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam for a briefing on whether a test case should be designated. In a Jan. 19 order, Judge M. Miller Baker bifurcated the motion for summary judgment procedure for a joint status report and proposed briefing schedule. All parties were asked to submit a joint status report no later than Feb. 9 to answer the question on consolidation (Auxin Solar v. United States, CIT # 23-00221, -00222, -00223, -00224, -00225, -00226, -00227, -00228, -00229).