While the U.S. remained neutral, a steel nail exporter on Feb. 8 called “moot” a petitioner’s motion to stay one antidumping duty appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit until the petitioner’s other interlocutory appeal had been heard (Oman Fasteners v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 24-1350).
Court of Federal Appeals Trade activity
The Court of International Trade on Feb. 12 sustained the Commerce Department's decision to use a simple average of standard deviations in the denominator of the Cohen's d test in detecting "masked" dumping as part of the antidumping investigation on steel nails from Taiwan. Despite a pair of decisions from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit rejecting the use of simple averages in this case, Judge Claire Kelly said she could find no fault with the logic Commerce employed.
DOJ attorney Robert Kiepura replaced Joshua Kurland as principal counsel in a case on the Commerce Department's countervailing duty investigation on wind towers from Canada. The court approved the change in a Feb. 8 order (Quebec v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 22-1807).
The U.S. Judicial Council's Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability's recent report sustaining the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's one-year suspension of Judge Pauline Newman didn't evaluate her constitutional claims, leaving that to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Newman told the district court (Pauline Newman v. Kimberly Moore, D.D.C. # 23-01334).
The U.S. told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to "refuse to reopen" the issue of exporter Double Coin's eligibility for a separate antidumping duty rate in a suit returned to the appellate court after the company failed to raise the issue on its first visit to the Federal Circuit (China Manufacturers Alliance v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-2391).
The U.S. Judicial Conference's Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability in a Feb. 7 decision denied U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Judge Pauline Newman's request for a review of the appellate court's decision to suspend her from hearing cases for a year, sustaining the sanction.
Seven plywood importers will not participate in the appeal of a case on the antidumping duty investigation of hardwood plywood from China after participating at the Court of International Trade. The companies -- Canusa Wood Products, Concannon Corp., Fabuwood Cabinetry Corp., Holland Southwest International, Liberty Woods International, Northwest Hardwood and USPly -- told the court of their decision in a statement last week (Linyi Chengen Import and Export Co. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 24-1258)
The U.S. on Feb. 2 asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit for another 60 days to file its opening brief in a case on the Commerce Department's antidumping duty investigation on hardwood plywood from China. All parties consented to the request (Linyi Chengen Import and Export Co. v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 24-1258).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Jan. 29 issued its mandate in a customs case on the classification of textile gloves with a plastic coating on the palm and fingers. The appellate court said the gloves fit under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 6116 as gloves and not as articles of plastic under heading 3926 (see 2312060028). Importer Magid argued that Section XI Note 1(h) excluded the gloves from heading 6116 and that the Federal Circuit's ruling in Kalle USA v. U.S., a case concerning sausage casing, precluded classification as textiles and apparel of Section XI (Magid Glove & Safety Manufacturing Co. v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 22-1793).
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.