The U.S. District Court for the District of Washington on Jan. 30 granted in part and denied in part importer Yakima Products' bid to seal parts of the complaint in a False Claims Act whistleblower suit against the company's alleged failure to pay import duties and false identification of the country of origin (United States v. Yakima Products Inc., D. Wash. # 21-0524).

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

Importers J. Conrad and Metropolitan Staple Corp. filed a stipulation of dismissal on Feb. 5 with the Court of International Trade in both of their cases challenging the expansion of the Section 232 steel and aluminum duties onto derivative products. The dismissals were filed in the wake of the Supreme Court's decision not to review a case from exporter Oman Fasteners on the same issue (see 2401080037). The high court's refusal to hear the case marked the sixth time the court turned down the opportunity to review presidential Section 232 action taken under President Donald Trump. The cases brought by J. Conrad and Metropolitan Staple Corp. were stayed until the Oman Fastener matter was final (J. Conrad Ltd v. United States, CIT # 20-00052) (Metropolitan Staple Corp. v. United States, CIT # 20-00053).

Importer Fit for Life sought reinstatement of its customs challenge Feb. 2 after it was dismissed that same day due to lack of prosecution (Fit for Life LLC v. U.S., CIT #20-00006).

The U.S. waived its right to file a response to a U.S. Supreme Court petition in a False Claims Act case brought by whistleblower Brutus Trading. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar said in the government's waiver, filed Feb. 2, that it won't respond to the petition "unless requested to do so by the Court" (Brutus Trading v. Standard Chartered, Sup. Ct. # 23-813).

In a Jan. 31 supplemental filing after oral arguments held a week earlier by the Court of International Trade, petitioners again rejected the Commerce Department's calculation of a Turkish exporter's duty drawback adjustment. On the same day, DOJ pushed back in its own supplemental filings on a pair of questions from the court (Assan Aluminyum Sanayi ve Ticaret v. U.S., CIT #21-00246).

A Canadian steel products exporter asked the Court of International Trade to reverse a Jan. 31 dismissal of six of its cases for failure to prosecute, saying its lawyers had accidentally overlooked the deadline while negotiating with the government out of court (Arcelormittal Long Products Canada G.P. v. U.S., CIT # 21-00037, -00038, -00039, -00040, -00041, -00042).

The Court of International Trade's mediation in a challenge from importer California Steel Industries seeking exclusions from Section 232 steel and aluminum duties "did not result in a settlement," the court said in a Feb. 2 report of mediation. While Judge M. Miller Baker presides over the case, Judge Leo Gordon served as "Judge Mediator" for the process, which wrapped up Feb. 1 (California Steel Industries v. U.S., CIT # 21-00015).

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

Correction: Fit for Life, a company that partners with brands such as Gaiam, Reebok, New Balance and Adidas, said at the Court of International Trade that CBP should have classified its imported balance ball chairs as seats of rubber or plastic, a duty-free provision under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 9401, rather than as “other articles and equipment for general physical exercises” under heading 9506, which carries a 4.6% duty (see 2402010049).