Indian exporter Kumar Industries withdrew its appeal of an antidumping duty case at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Feb. 23. The company said that it "has elected not to further pursue its appeal," noting that the U.S. consented to the withdrawal (Kumar Industries v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 24-1293).

The U.S. Supreme Court on Feb. 26 said it won't review whether whistleblower Brutus Trading should've been granted a hearing by a lower court in its case accusing U.K.-based Standard Chartered Bank of violating sanctions against Iran.

The Court of International Trade has jurisdiction over an importer’s case under 28 U.S.C. § 1581(i) because it has previously ruled that an administrative protest against an entry’s liquidation cannot be brought before the liquidation has occurred, that importer said in a brief contesting the U.S. motion to dismiss (Fraserview Remanufacturing Inc. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00063).

Importer Seneca Foods Corp. opposed the U.S. attempt to extend the deadline to file its remand results in a suit on the Commerce Department's decision to reject the company's requests for exclusions from Section 232 steel and aluminum duties. The government asked for another 31 days to file its remand decision after initially being given 90 days to conduct the remand and a 45-day extension (Seneca Foods Corp. v. United States, CIT # 22-00243).

The Court of International Trade sustained the Commerce Department's remand results in a Feb. 26 confidential order in a case on the antidumping duty investigation on raw honey from Argentina. In a letter to the parties, Judge Claire Kelly said it's her intention to issue a public version of the opinion on or shortly after March 5, giving the parties until March 4 to review the confidential information. In the remand results, Commerce continued to use respondent Nexco's acquisition costs as a proxy for the cost of production of beekeeper supplies (see 2310130049). The agency also struck by its decision to compare Nexco's U.S. sale prices with normal values based on Nexco's third-country sale prices to Germany on a monthly basis instead of a quarterly basis (Nexco v. U.S., CIT # 22-00203).

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

After a second remand, the Commerce Department said Feb. 22 that despite conducting a previously impossible on-site verification of the sole mandatory respondent for an AD investigation on forged steel fittings from India, its negative finding remained unchanged (Bonney Forge Corporation v. U.S., CIT #20-03837).

Parties on the defendants’ side in two cases Feb. 21 opposed a motion of joinder in separate briefs, saying that, although both were litigating claims against an affirmative International Trade Commission injury determination in antidumping and countervailing duty investigations on Mexican and Chinese rail couplers, their cases raise “unique” legal issues with little crossover (Amsted Rail Ind. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00268; Wabtec Corp. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00157).

The Commerce Department reversed its use of Descartes ocean freight data in various subsidy calculations on remand in a case on the 2021 countervailing duty review of crystalline silicon photovoltaic products from China. Instead of using an average of Descartes and Xeneta data, the agency said it decided to solely use the Xeneta in response to concerns raised by the Court of International Trade (Trina Solar (Changzhou) Science & Technology Co. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00219).

No lawsuits have been filed recently at the Court of International Trade.