Importer Detroit Axle opposed the government's motions for an extension of time to respond to the company's motions for leave to amend its complaint and for partial summary judgment in its case against President Donald Trump's decision to end the de minimis threshold for goods from China. Detroit Axle said the U.S. "has failed to establish 'good cause'" for being given another 35 days to respond to the motions to amend and for partial summary judgment if the Court of International Trade dissolves the stay of the case (Axle of Dearborn d/b/a Detroit Axle v. United States, CIT # 25-00091).
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:
The U.S. on Sept. 24 opposed a company’s motion to resume its case challenging the end of de minimis, arguing that the case still raises the same legal questions as V.O.S. Selections vs. U.S. despite a new executive order officially rescinding de minimis globally (Axle of Dearborn d/b/a Detroit Axle v. United States, CIT # 25-00091).
The Commerce Department rejected a submission from respondent Assan Aluminyum as untimely in its third remand results in a case on the antidumping duty investigation on common alloy aluminum sheet from Turkey at the Court of International Trade. Despite accepting the submission in its second remand results, the agency said on remand that the information in the submission didn't correct information from the company's earlier submission but rather was an "untimely effort by Assan to supplement its own prior questionnaire response" (Assan Aluminyum Sanayi ve Ticaret v. United States, CIT Consol. # 21-00246).
Detroit Axle, the company challenging President Donald Trump's decision to eliminate the de minimis threshold on goods from China, moved to set aside the Court of International Trade's stay of its case pending the lead suit on tariff action taken under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The company said while the relief it's seeking initially overlapped with the relief sought by the plaintiffs in the lead tariff suit, that's "no longer the case" in light of Trump's recent executive order rescinding the de minimis threshold globally (Axle of Dearborn d/b/a Detroit Axle v. United States, CIT # 25-00091).
The Commerce Department appropriately resorted to total adverse facts available against countervailing duty respondent Pastificio Gentile in the 2021 CVD review of Italian pasta, for failing to report all its affiliated companies, the Court of International Trade held in a decision made public Sept. 3. However, Judge Mark Barnett remanded the review for Commerce to explain the legal basis under which the agency decided to countervail programs it verified were unused during the period of review as part of the AFA treatment.
On remand, the Commerce Department determined Aug. 29 that it wouldn’t use the Cohen’s d test in its calculation of German paper exporter Koehler Paper SE’s antidumping duty margin, instead applying its new “price difference test” (Matra Americas v. United States, CIT # 21-00632).
Exporters brought a number complaints Aug. 22 and Aug. 25 challenging the Commerce Department’s decision to countervail transnational subsidies in its investigations on solar cells from Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam (Boviet Solar Technology v. United States, CIT #s 25-00160 and 25-00162; JA Solar Vietnam Co. v. United States, CIT #s 25-00157 and 25-00158; Trina Solar Science & Technology (Thailand) v. United States, CIT # 25-00166 and 25-00169; Canadian Solar International v. United States, CIT #s 25-00159 and 25-00161; Jinko Solar (Vietnam) Industries Company v. United States, CIT #s 25-00171 and 25-00172).
The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:
Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week, in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.