Importer Magid Glove & Safety Manufacturing and DOJ argued during oral arguments Sept. 7 whether a test established in a previous U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit case meant that plastic-dipped knit gloves are correctly classified as articles of plastic rather than as gloves under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (Magid Glove & Safety Manufacturing v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 22-1793).
Court of Federal Appeals Trade activity
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.
A lawsuit from U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Judge Pauline Newman against her colleagues' investigation into her fitness to continue serving on the bench should be dismissed, CAFC Judges Kimberly Moore, Sharon Prost and Richard Taranto argued in a Sept. 1 motion to dismiss. The judges -- who comprise the three-judge panel carrying out the investigation on the 96-year-old Newman -- said that Newman's suit "suffers from fatal jurisdictional flaws" (The Hon. Pauline Newman v. The Hon. Kimberly A. Moore, D.D.C. # 23-01334).
The U.S. and antidumping duty petitioner Wind Tower Trade Coalition failed to respond to the "critical arguments" raised by exporter Dongkuk S&C Co. in a case on the AD investigation on utility scale wind towers from South Korea, Dongkuk told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In a Sept. 1 reply brief, Dongkuk said both the government and the coalition did not, or could not, establish that the Commerce Department relied on substantial evidence when it weight averaged the respondent's steel plate cost for all reported control numbers (CONNUMs) (Dongkuk S&C Co. v. U.S., Fed. Cir. #23-1419).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a Sept. 7 order upheld the International Trade Commission's negative injury determination in the antidumping duty investigation on fabricated structural steel from China. Judges Jimmie Reyna, William Bryson and Tiffany Cunningham ruled against the Full Member Subgroup of the American Institute of Steel Construction in finding that the ITC did not err by declining to settle an alleged ambiguity in the scope of the domestic like product, deciding that the captive production exception is not applicable and declaring that imports of fabricated structural steel did not lead to significant price effects.
Counsel for importer Magid Glove & Safety Manufacturing Co. was allowed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to appear remotely for the company's oral argument in its customs suit on plastic-dipped knit gloves. Magid Gloves brought its case to the appellate court after the Court of International Trade said the gloves belong under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 6116 instead of under heading 3926 (see 2203280037). In its arguments, the importer said the case rests on the definition of "completely embedded," claiming that "if the knit fabric making up the shell of the glove is completely embedded in plastic, the gloves" would not fit under Section XI and, thus, from heading 6116 (Magid Glove & Safety Manufacturing Co. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 22-1793).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its mandate Sept. 1 in a case on the Commerce Department's use of adverse facts available against countervailing duty respondent Jangho Group. In a ruling on the 2013 review of the CVD order on aluminum extrusions, the appellate court upheld the Court of International Trade in its ruling that Commerce properly found the Chinese government and Jangho Group failed to respond to the best of their ability on whether aluminum extrusions producers are "authorities" (see 2205100076) (Taizhou United Imp. & Exp. Co. v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 22-2000).
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.
Door thresholds imported by Worldwide Door Components and Columbia Aluminum Products are both expressly and generally within the scope of antidumping and countervailing orders on aluminum extrusions from China, petitioner Aluminum Extrusions Fair Trade Committee said in an Aug. 29 reply at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Worldwide Door Components v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-1532) (Columbia Aluminum Products v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-1534).
Exporter Tau-Ken Temir waived its arguments against the Commerce Department's decision to grant the company's first two extension requests in part and reject the third request, the U.S. argued in a reply brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The government said that because TKT did not raise the issues either at Commerce or at the Court of International Trade in its case on the countervailing duty investigation on silicon metal from Kazakhstan, the appellate court need not address the claims (Tau-Ken Temir v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 22-2204).