No lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade.
Against opposition from exporters (see 2411190063), the U.S. supported Nov. 21 the Commerce Department’s continued decision on remand to use an inter-quarter comparison for an aspect of an administrative review and same-quarter comparisons for another (see 2409240022) (Universal Tube and Plastic Industries v. U.S., CIT # 23-00113).
In an eight-count complaint, the Israeli government took issue Nov. 22 with the International Trade Commission’s affirmative injury finding regarding Israeli brass rods. Among other things, Tel Aviv said that the Oct. 7, 2023, terrorist attack on Israel, which occurred a week after the period of investigation ended, disincentivized underselling by the country’s exporters because it “significantly impaired” their manufacturing (Government of Israel, Ministery of Economy and Industry v. U.S., CIT # 24-00197).
The Commerce Department properly decided not to reopen the record to inflate Mexican surrogate wage data and ultimately choose Brazilian wage data in the antidumping duty investigation on beer kegs from China, the Court of International Trade said. Sustaining Commerce's third remand results in the case, Judge M. Miller Baker said the agency reasonably said it was "unnecessary to reopen the record to inflate the Mexican wage figures" when the Brazilian data "suited the agency's purposes."
The Court of International Trade on Nov. 25 allowed exporters NS Brands and Naturesweet Invernaderos S. de R.L. de C.V. to intervene in a case challenging the results of a 27-year-old antidumping duty investigation. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves held that the companies showed good cause for waiting nearly five years in seeking to intervene in the case because the trade court "drastically changed the landscape of this litigation by ordering" the Commerce Department to investigate the 1995-96 tomato market "approximately 29 years" later. It would have been "nearly impossible in 2019 for NatureSweet" to anticipate the court's decision when the case was first filed, the judge said.
CBP failed to consider material evidence when it found that importer Scioto Valley Woodworking didn't evade the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on wooden cabinets and vanities from China, the Court of International Trade said in a decision made public last week. Judge Lisa Wang said CBP didn't sufficiently consider evidence of the Haiyan Group's ownership of Scioto and its affiliated supplier, Alno, and it didn't adequately discuss the contents of an additional warehouse disclosed by Alno.
The Court of International Trade on Tuesday denied a U.S. motion to dismiss a case brought by importer UniChem, finding the court has jurisdiction over all litigation resulting from denied protests of detentions of imports upon entry. UniChem claimed that CBP seized its entry of weight loss supplements and wrongfully held it for over a year -- long past the maximum 30-day seizure authorized by statute. The U.S. unsuccessfully sought to dismiss the claim, arguing the trade court lacks jurisdiction because the Drug Enforcement Agency, not CBP, made the detention decision. CIT Judge Timothy Reif held that CBP makes all detention decisions under U.S. trade law (UniChem Enterprises v. U.S., CIT # 24-00033).
Importer Printing Textiles, doing business as Berger Textiles, will appeal a Court of International Trade decision sustaining the Commerce Department's scope ruling that includes Printing Textile's "Canvas Banner Matisse" imports within the scope of the antidumping duty order on artist canvas from China (see 2410090022). In its decision, the trade court found the following sentence to be ambiguous: "Priming/coating includes the application of a solution, designed to promote the adherence of artist materials, such as paint or ink, to the fabric." The court said Commerce's interpretation of this sentence wasn't "per se unreasonable," rejecting Printing Textiles' bid for a narrow interpretation of the words "priming/coating" (Printing Textiles, d/b/a Berger Textiles v. U.S., CIT # 23-00192).
The U.S. moved for a default judgment against importer E-Dong U.S.A. in a customs penalty suit at the Court of International Trade after the company failed to respond to the government's complaint. The U.S. brought the suit in March accusing E-Dong of failing to pay federal excise tax on entries of soju bottles from South Korea (see 2403290035). The government said the company entered the soju via "material or false statement" by failing to reference any of the owed excise tax. The summons and complaint were filed on March 28, and on Oct. 12, E-Dong was deemed served (U.S. v. E-Dong, U.S.A., CIT # 24-00066).
The U.S. defended the methodology it used to calculate the amount of supplier subsides attributable to exporters Les Produits Forestiers D&G and its cross-owned affiliates, led by Les Produits Forestiers Portbec, on remand in a case on the expedited countervailing duty review of Canadian softwood lumber. Filing remand comments on Nov. 15, the government said two alternative methodologies floated by the petitioner, the Committee Overseeing Action for Lumber International Trade Investigations or Negotiations, both fall short (Committee Overseeing Action for Lumber International Trade Investigations or Negotiations v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 19-00122).