In two briefs Dec. 8, U.S. shrimp producers again supported the International Trade Commission's finding that shrimp imports from Ecuador, India and Vietnam injured the U.S. industry (Industrial Pesquera Santa Priscila v. United States, CIT # 25-00029) (Seafood Exporters Association of India v. United States, CIT # 25-00031) (Shrimp Committee of the Vietnam Association of Seafood Exporters and Producers v. United States, CIT # 25-00032).
The Court of International Trade sustained the Commerce Department's surrogate value pick for ocean freight charges and its valuation of minor fabricated components in the antidumping duty investigation on mobile access equipment from China. Judge M. Miller Baker upheld the agency's decisions as reasonable after initially remanding both selections.
The Court of International Trade on Dec. 12 denied the government's motion for reconsideration of the trade court's previous decision to vacate CBP's finding that Dominican exporter Kingtom Aluminio made its aluminum extrusions with forced labor. Although Judge Timothy Reif said he made a mistake of fact in the initial decision, the mistake was a "harmless error," and that no mistake of law was made.
The U.S. on Dec. 11 filed its opposition to a motion for a preliminary injunction in dozens of cases filed by Crowell & Moring seeking refunds of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (AGS Company Automotive Solutions v. United States, CIT Consol. # 25-00255).
The Commerce Department interpreted and applied its regulations contrary to Section 751(h) of the Tariff Act of 1930 when it rejected petitioner Catfish Farmers of America's ministerial error allegation in an antidumping review, the Court of International Trade held on Dec. 15. Judge Timothy Stanceu said Commerce erred in only allowing the petitioner to raise ministerial error allegations regarding the final determination that couldn't have been raised in the petitioner's case brief, finding that this cut against the "express requirement of Section 751(h)." However, the judge did uphold the agency's decision not to use facts otherwise available against respondent CASEAMEX related to its reporting of its packing costs.
The Court of International Trade on Dec. 15 denied a motion for an injunction stopping liquidation of entries from a group of importers that filed challenges to International Emergency Economic Powers Act tariffs. Judges Gary Katzmann, Timothy Reif and Jane Restani held that an injunction is unnecessary because the trade court has the authority to reliquidate finally liquidated entries from the importers that filed suit under the court's 28 U.S.C. 1581(i) jurisdiction if the Supreme Court invalidates the tariffs. The judges also noted the government's commitment that it won't fight against CIT's ability to order refunds, finding the U.S. is barred from changing its position in the future.
The following lawsuits were filed recently at the Court of International Trade:
The U.S. moved to toss a group of importers' counterclaims in a customs penalty case for failure to identify a proper "jurisdictional grant or cause of action," arguing that the companies should have raised their claims before the Commerce Department first (United States v. Lexjet, CIT # 23-00105).
Attorneys at Crowell & Moring asked the Court of International Trade on Dec. 11 for a hearing regarding its motion for a preliminary injunction in its lead case seeking refunds from tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (AGS Company Automotive Solutions v. United States, CIT # 25-00255).
The Court of International Trade "rewrote" a precedential decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and "effectively nullified" three AD/CVD orders on magnesia carbon bricks (MCBs) from China when it held that MCBs that contain any amount of alumina are excluded from the orders, the Magnesia Carbon Bricks Fair Trade Committee said (Fedmet Resources v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 26-1160).