The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a June 7 order granted Porsche Motorsports North America's motion to voluntarily dismiss its case seeking duty-free treatment of auto parts temporarily exported then reimported. The Court of International Trade previously denied Porsche this treatment, ruling that auto parts exported to Canada for use at auto races then re-imported don't qualify for duty-free treatment under a U.S. goods returned tariff provision for "tools of the trade" (see 2201030038). The trade court found that the auto parts and tools were exported to generate sales to race teams rather than for a professional purpose, as required under subheading 9801.00.8500.
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.
The Commerce Department erred by finding that South Korea's provision of electricity below cost "conferred a non-measurable benefit," countervailing duty petitioner Nucor Corp. argued in a June 6 complaint at the Court of International Trade. Nucor railed against the "evidentiary flaws" Commerce relied on from cost data from South Korea's sole supplier of electricity, the Korean Electric Power Corporation (KEPCO), but said that even using this data, it's clear that a benefit was conferred to the mandatory respondents (Nucor Corporation v. United States, CIT #22-00137).
The Commerce Department altered the basis for its use of adverse facts available on remand at the Court of International Trade in an antidumping case after the court said that antidumping respondent Dalian Meisen Woodworking's false advertisements cannot be used as grounds for AFA. Submitting its remand results on June 6, Commerce said that after issuing a host of new questionnaires to Meisen, including a questionnaire in lieu of on-site verification, it changed its bases for AFA, now basing it on the respondent's failure to provide "critical information" in the questionnaire and all of its U.S. affiliates (Dalian Meisen Woodworking Co. v. United States, CIT #20-00109).
In a series of three opinions, the Court of International Trade denied domestic honey, crawfish, garlic and mushroom producers' bids for reconsideration of the court's past ruling dismissing some of their claims as time-barred by the statute of limitations. The cases, led by Adee Honey Farms, Hilex Poly and American Drew, sought court orders to get CBP to distribute delinquency interest that should be paid to affected domestic producers under the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000. Previously, Judge Timothy Stanceu said that the only timely claims were the ones relating to the application of the Final Rule to the plaintiffs' individual CDSOA distributions happening in the two years before their implementing their actions. In the June 8 opinions, Stanceu held that no "valid reason" was put forth as to why the court should vacate or modify the decisions to dismiss the untimely claims.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its mandate in three cases challenging an antidumping duty investigation's final determination subject to a suspension agreement. In the opinions, the appellate court held that the plaintiff-appellants have the right to judicially challenge the final determination even if they're subject to a suspension agreement, though it did dismiss many of the claims made in the actual actions (Red Sun Farms v. United States, Fed. Cir. #20-2230) (Confederacion de Asociaciones Agricolas del Estado de Sinaloa v. United States, Fed. Cir. #20-2232) (Jem D International (Michigan) Inc. USA v. United States, Fed. Cir. #21-1292).
Magnesia alumina carbon (MAC) brick exporter Fedmet Resources' move to oppose the U.S. stay motion in an Enforce and Protect Act case only delays resolution, DOJ argued in a June 3 reply brief at the Court of International Trade. Fedmet opposes the stay and seeks the filing of a voluntary remand in a window that the U.S. says is impossible since it needs a covered merchandise referral determination from the Commerce Department -- the matter at the heart of the contested stay motion (Fedmet Resources v. U.S., CIT #21-00248).
Imported carbon steel tubing lined with epoxy coating are insulated for tariff schedule purposes, and should be classified under heading 8547 as insulating fittings for electrical machines, appliances or equipment, importer Shamrock Building Materials said in a motion for summary judgment filed June 6 at the Court of International Trade (Shamrock Building Materials, Inc. v. United States, CIT # 20-00074).
Legalization at the state level allows importer Keirton USA to “manufacture, possess, or distribute” marijuana but doesn't constitute a specific authorization to go against the "uniform Federal ban" on drug paraphernalia imports, DOJ said in a June 6 brief at the Court of International Trade (Keirton USA v. U.S. Customs and Border Protection, CIT #21-00452).