The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Steel nail importer Hilti dismissed its case at the Court of International Trade following the Supreme Court's decision not to review a case on President Donald Trump's expansion of Section 232 duties onto steel and aluminum "derivative" products. The high court's decision marked the sixth time the court has declined to address whether Trump legally expanded the duties beyond procedural deadlines (see 2401080037). Hilti stayed its case pending resolution of the case rejected by the Supreme Court (Hilti, Inc. v. United States, CIT # 21-00216).
A frozen fruit importer appealed Jan. 11 to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit seeking to overturn the Court of International Trade’s May 30 ruling that 14 types of its fruit mixtures should be classified as “other” frozen fruits, not “food preparations not elsewhere specified,” under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (Nature's Touch Frozen Foods (West) v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-2093).
The U.S. argued that a customs suit is ready for a decision on whether the Cozy -- a textile marketed as a "wearable blanket" -- is a pullover or a blanket. Filing a brief in support of its motion for summary judgment, the government said importer Cozy Comfort's issues are not with the facts but with the U.S. interpretation of the terms "pullover" and "similar articles" under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 6110 (Cozy Comfort Co. v. United States, CIT # 22-00173).
The U.S. asked the Court of International Trade on Jan. 9 to bar a wristwatch importer from using any materials the importer provided the government in its supplement to a document production request, saying it had been untimely (Ildico Inc. v. U.S., CIT # 18-00136).
The U.S. and antidumping duty petitioner Wind Tower Trade Coalition defended the Commerce Department's decision to weight average, or "smooth," respondent Marmen's steel plate costs in the AD investigation on utility scale wind towers from Canada (Marmen v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1877).
The following lawsuits were filed recently at the Court of International Trade:
Home Depot on Jan. 10 dropped its lawsuit in the Court of International Trade challenging the president's authority to expand Section 232 national security tariffs beyond procedural deadlines. The U.S. Supreme Court this week denied a petition for writ of certiorari from steel nail maker Oman Fasteners, marking the sixth time the court has declined to address whether President Donald Trump legally expanded Section 232 duties on steel and aluminum derivatives (see 2401080037). Counsel for Home Depot confirmed in an email that its case was abandoned following the Supreme Court's most recent rejection (Home Depot USA v. U.S., CIT # 22-00014).
An Indian stainless steel flanges exporter sought Jan. 8 to have the Court of International Trade reconsider part of its opinion upholding the company’s adverse facts available antidumping duty rate from the 2018-19 administrative review on its products (Kisaan Die Tech Private Ltd. v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 21-00512).
The following lawsuit was filed recently at the Court of International Trade: