Importer Acquisition 362, d/b/a Strategic Import Supply (SIS), filed a petition for writ of certiorari at the U.S. Supreme Court of a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit opinion requiring protests to be filed within 180 days of liquidation and not the date the Commerce Department issues antidumping and countervailing duty instructions to CBP. SIS said that by establishing this requirement, the appellate court eliminated one statutory mechanism under which importers can file protests and encourages "premature, incomplete, sham protest filings" (Acquisition 362 v. U.S., U.S. # 22-1102).
The U.S. reply in a scope case on Vandewater International's steel branch outlets fails to follow either scope principle established by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's key precedential opinion in Arcelormittal Stainless Belg. v. U.S., appellant Sigma Corp. told the appellate court in a reply brief. In violation of Arcelormittal, the government interpreted the antidumping duty order on butt-weld pipe fittings from China in a vacuum devoid of any consideration of the way the order's language is used in the relevant industry and identified ambiguity where none exists, Sigma argued (Vandewater International v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1093).
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Judge Pauline Newman filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in a bid to stop CAFC Judge Kimberly Moore's investigation of Newman's fitness to continue serving on the court. Retaining the New Civil Liberties Alliance as counsel, Newman argued that the fitness proceedings constitute a violation of the separation of powers as spelled out in the U.S. Constitution (The Hon. Pauline Newman v. The Hon. Kimberly A. Moore, D.D.C. # 23-01334).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its mandate in a countervailing duty scope case in which the court said exporter China Custom Manufacturing's solar panel mounts do not qualify for the "finished merchandise" exclusions from the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on aluminum extrusions from China (see 2303020037). CCM unsuccessfully filed for a rehearing of the opinion, arguing that the court needed to look at the case again to ensure uniformity of the appellate court's prior decisions on the "unambiguous plain language" of the finished merchandise exclusion rule (China Custom Manufacturing v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 22-1345).
Byungmin Chae filed a petition May 9 for a rehearing of a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit opinion that landed him one question shy of passing the customs broker exam he took in April 2018. The multiple choice question asked which mail articles are not subject to CBP examination or inspection (Byungmin Chae v. Janet Yellen, Fed. Cir. # 22-2017).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit granted exporter SeAH Steel's motion to voluntarily dismiss its appeal on the Commerce Department's use of the Cohen's d test, which is used to root out "masked" dumping. Recently, the Court of International Trade upheld Commerce's explanations of its use of the test in response to questions raised by the Federal Circuit (see 2302270049) (SeAH Steel v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1657).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit should not allow countervailing duty respondent Tau-Ken Temir to "continually revise its opening brief under the guise of a Notice of Correction," CVD petitioners Globe Specialty Metal and Mississippi Silicon argued in a reply brief. Voicing their opposition to TKT's and the Kazakh Ministry of Trade Integration's request to file a fourth opening brief, Globe and Mississippi Silicon said that "even a cursory review of the changes" shows a "litany of changes that are substantive in nature, including new arguments and sentences, deletions of material, and large-scale replacements of discussion" (Tau-Ken Temir v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 22-2204).
The Court of International Trade erred in failing to grant importer Meyer Corp. first sale treatment when valuing its cookware imports, the importer told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in its opening brief. In one of "two major assignments of error," Meyer said CIT impermissibly rejected first sale prices based on the absence of financial information from Meyer's parent company, Meyer International Holdings (Meyer Corp. v. United States, Fed. Cir. #23-1570).
Exporter SeAH Steel Corp. moved to voluntarily toss its appeal at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on the Commerce Department's use of the Cohen's d test, which is used to identify "masked" dumping. All the other parties in the case consented to the dismissal, SeAH said. The move comes just days after Maverick Tube Corp, Tenaris Bay City and IPSCO Tubulars said they no longer would participate in the proceedings (see 2305040021). Recently, the Court of International Trade said Commerce answered questions raised by the Federal Circuit on the use of the d test (see 2302270049) (SeAH Steel Corp. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1657).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit should let appellants Tau-Ken Temir and Kazakhstan's Ministry of Trade and Integration make corrections to their opening brief, they said May 8. The parties said they would have filed an additional extension motion had their counsel known of a previously undisclosed visit by U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken to Kazakhstan on the day the brief was due (Tau-Ken Temir v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 22-2204).