The U.S. and importer SGS Sports submitted a stipulation of facts and joint motion for the entry of a judgment in a customs case on the classification of reimported swimsuits, avoiding a bench trial over whether the swimsuits qualify for Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 9801.00.20 as U.S. goods returned (SGS Sports v. United States, CIT # 18-00128).
The Court of International Trade in a Jan. 8 text-only order denied Florida man Zhe "John" Liu's motion to amend the protective order in a customs penalty case against Liu and his company GL Paper Distribution. The U.S. said the motion was another attempt to get around the limits of discovery in a separate criminal proceeding against Liu (United States v. Zhe "John" Liu, CIT # 22-00215).
The Commerce Department on remand altered its analysis on whether an additional allotment of traceable carbon emissions credits in South Korea constituted a financial contribution. Submitting remand results to the Court of International Trade on Jan. 5, Commerce said that the South Korean government's decision to distribute additional free allowances of carbon emissions credits constitutes a "direct transfer of funds," rather than revenue forgone by the foreign government (Hyundai Steel Co. v. U.S., CIT # 22-00170).
The Court of International Trade in a Jan. 8 opinion rejected a motion from the U.S. seeking to retract the court's public opinion sustaining an affirmative injury finding from the International Trade Commission and to bracket information the government said was confidential. Touting the need for transparency in the court system, Judge Stephen Vaden said that the information the government sought to redact -- certain company names and numerical approximations -- is not confidential because the ITC failed to properly bracket it during litigation or the information is publicly available. The judge noted that neither "administrative agencies nor this Court can hide from scrutiny by censoring information," adding that only "truly confidential" information may be hidden from the public.
The following lawsuits were filed recently at the Court of International Trade:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Jan. 5 granted a motion to dismiss an appeal of a countervailing duty suit from the U.S. and petitioner Nucor Corp. The court lifted the stay in the case and dismissed the case after also considering the "non-participation" of exporters POSCO and Hyundai Steel Co. and the South Korean government (POSCO v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 22-1576).
The U.S. opposed Florida man Zhe "John" Liu's motion to amend the protective order in a customs penalty suit seemingly to allow Liu to review documents produced by the U.S. The government said the protective order doesn't need to be amended since it supplies the defendant with the "full ability to review the materials provided to him in discovery," adding that Liu "conjures a dilemma where none exists" and his reasoning appears to be pretextual for gaining evidence he isn't entitled to "under the governing criminal discovery rules" (U.S. v. Zhe "John" Liu, CIT # 22-00215).
The Commerce Department shouldn't have rejected a ministerial error comment submitted by The Ancientree Cabinet Co. that pointed out an incorrect dumping margin calculated by the agency, Ancientree said Jan. 5. The company called Commerce’s rejection “arbitrary and an abuse of discretion” (The Ancientree Cabinet Co. v. United States, CIT # 23-00262).
The Court of International Trade on Jan. 5 issued a confidential opinion sustaining the sixth antidumping duty review on steel nails from Oman. Oman Fasteners brought suit to contest the Commerce Department's use of adverse facts available against the exporter for supposedly failing to submit all of its responses to Commerce's supplemental questionnaire by the deadline (Oman Fasteners v. U.S., CIT # 22-00348).
Tire Exporter's Challenge to Presumption of NME State Control Sunk by CAFC Case Law, Petitioner Says
The Commerce Department has not established an "irrebuttable presumption" of state control for exporters in nonmarket economies, antidumping duty petitioner the United Steelworkers labor union argued in a Jan. 5 reply brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Pirelli Tyre Co. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-2266).