The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Sept. 25 issued its mandate in a countervailing duty case regarding the propriety of the Commerce Department's approach to rejecting untimely submissions. In August, the appellate court said Commerce abused its discretion in rejecting a submission from respondent Tau-Ken Temir in the CVD investigation on silicon metal from Kazakhstan that was filed one hour and 41 minutes late (see 2508040031). The court said that, going forward, courts considering the agency's rejection of untimely documents shall consider the "remedial-not-punitive purpose" of AD/CVD laws, the burden imposed on Commerce that would result from accepting the submission, whether "any finality concerns would be implicated" and the "late-filing party's efforts" and its "reasons for the submission's untimeliness" (Tau-Ken Temir v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 22-2204).

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit on Sept. 24 ordered supplemental briefing in a case concerning the legality of tariffs imposed on Native Americans on the question of whether the court has subject matter jurisdiction to review an order transferring cases to another district court (Susan Webber v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 9th Cir. # 25-2717).

The Commerce Department on Sept. 24 again maintained its calculation of an input’s tier two price benchmark and again applied adverse facts available to a mandatory respondent in its new results on remand regarding the 2020 administrative review of the countervailing duty order on Chinese multilayered wood flooring (Baroque Timber Industries (Zhongshan) Co. v. United States, CIT # 23-00136).

The Court of International Trade on Sept. 22 signed off on the settlement of a customs penalty suit the U.S. brought against importer Katana Racing. Under the settlement, Katana agreed to pay $2.35 million to resolve the case, which involved $5.8 million in unpaid duties and penalties related to the company's tire imports (see 2509050067) (U.S. v. Katana Racing, CIT # 19-00125).

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Sept. 23 directed the Court of International Trade to transfer a certain physical exhibit to the appeals court in importer Cozy Comfort's customs case on the classification of its oversized pullover, The Comfy. Cozy moved the Federal Circuit without opposition to transfer a physical sample of The Comfy and its retail packaging to the court so the sample is "available for inspection by this Court and the parties at oral argument" (Cozy Comfort v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 25-1889).

CBP told the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Sept. 22 that communications between it and Apple didn't show that the agency coordinated with Apple to skirt a limited exclusion order (LEO) from the International Trade Commission that bars the importation of Apple Watch products that infringe Masimo's patents (Masimo v. U.S. Customs and Border Protection, D.D.C. # 25-02749).

The International Trade Commission "dodges" the substantive arguments made against its affirmative injury finding on Israeli brass rod and, instead, repeatedly asks the Court of International Trade to defer to its "flawed methodologies," the Israeli government's Ministry of Economy and Industry argued in a reply brief filed last week at the trade court (Government of Israel v. United States, CIT # 24-00197).

The Court of International Trade sustained the Commerce Department's second remand results in a case on the 2019 administrative review of the countervailing duty order on hot-rolled steel flat products from South Korea, in a confidential decision. Judge Mark Barnett gave the parties until Sept. 29 to review the confidential information in the decision. In the remand results, Commerce said the Korean government's full allotment of emissions permits under the Korean Emissions Trading System was de facto specific, switching its previous determination that the full allotment was de jure specific following a remand order from Barnett (see 2407310039). Opening the record on remand, the agency added new data to the record and, with this data, said 504 companies got the full 100% allotment of the permits and that over 787,000 companies operated in Korea in 2019, meaning the program can't be considered "widely used" throughout the economy (Hyundai Steel Co. v. United States, CIT # 22-00170).

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit on Sept. 23 set aside part of the Federal Maritime Commission's rule limiting the parties against whom "demurrage and detention" fees may be assessed. Judges Sri Srinivasan, Robert Wilkins and J. Michelle Childs held that the commission arbitrarily and capriciously exempted motor carriers from being assessed these fees, given the FMC's "stated rationale" to confine fees to parties who are in a "contractual relationship with the billing party."

A convicted smuggler of dangerously bright headlights filed status reports Sept. 17 in two civil cases for which he and the United States have been in ongoing settlement negotiations, requesting three more months to “finalize” their agreements (United States v. Chu-Chiang "Kevin" Ho, CIT # 19-00102 and -00038).