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

Target General Merchandise said in a Feb. 20 response to a U.S. cross-motion for judgment in its classification case that it no longer will be disputing CBP’s classification of its artificial Christmas trees, explaining that the government is already arguing that the trees should be classified under a duty-free Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading (Target General Merchandise v. United States, CIT Consol. # 15-00069).

Importer Mitsubishi Power Americas asked leave Feb. 18 from the Court of International Trade to file a short sur-reply to the U.S.’s support of a cross-motion for judgment (Mitsubishi Power Americas v. United States, CIT # 21-00573).

A federal court in Kentucky found that Arms Export Control Act and International Traffic in Arms Regulations licensing requirements for technical data don't violate the First Amendment as a restriction on free speech. Judge David Hale of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Kentucky said the licensing requirements "advance important government interests unrelated to the suppression of free speech" and don't burden "substantially more speech than necessary to further those interests" (United States v. Pascoe, W.D. Ky. # 3:22-88).

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

The Court of International Trade on Feb. 20 consolidated nine cases challenging the Commerce Department's scope determination in the antidumping duty investigation on aluminum extrusions from China and nine cases challenging the scope determination in the countervailing duty investigation on the same products. The court also stayed the consolidated cases pending the trade court's first decision in a separate case on the International Trade Commission's injury determination on the products (Dorman Products v. United States, CIT #s 24-00236, -00237).

Dominican exporter Kingtom Aluminio asked the Court of International Trade to expedite its challenge to CBP's finding that the company makes aluminum extrusions using forced labor, arguing that there's a "very real possibility" the company will have to "cease operations and file for bankruptcy as a result of" the forced labor finding (Kingtom Aluminio v. United States, CIT # 24-00264).

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Feb. 20 allowed patent attorney Andrew Dhuey to appear as amicus curiae to defend Court of International Trade Judge Stephen Vaden's decision rejecting an unopposed motion to redact certain confidential information from the merits decision on an antidumping duty and countervailing duty injury determination. CAFC Judge Leonard Stark took up Dhuey on his offer, appointing him "in support" of the trade court's decision (In Re United States, Fed. Cir. # 24-1566).

In a reply brief Feb. 18, domestic petitioner Wind Tower Trade Coalition again argued that a review respondent’s conversion costs calculation should have been based only on its towers’ physical characteristics, not its monthly production quantity (Wind Tower Trade Coalition v. United States, CIT # 24-00070).

The International Trade Commission erred in failing to consider diesel fuel price increases when assessing whether imports of frozen warmwater shrimp from Ecuador, India, Indonesia and Vietnam harmed the U.S. industry, Ecuadorian respondents Industrial Pesquera Santa Priscila and Sociedad Nacional De Galapagos argued. Filing a complaint at the Court of International Trade on Feb. 18, the pair said the injury finding was unsupported by the record, due to the lack of information about fuel price increases (Industrial Pesquera Santa Priscila v. United States, CIT # 25-00029).