Aida and the Department of Justice are seeking testimony from three Italian employees of Aida who possess specialized knowledge required in an ongoing case at the Court of International Trade concerning the proper value of six industrial stamping presses, they said in a joint request to Judge Stephen Vaden asking him to issue an order appointing a commissioner authorized to take testimony in Italy and to issue a Letter of Request to Aida's and DOJ's local counsels in Italy. In its initial complaint, Aida claimed that CBP liquidated two entries based on incorrect appraisal by Aida's customs broker in 2015. Aida challenged the appraised value of the items via a protest, which was denied in 2018. In order to move forward with the case, both Aida and DOJ agree that testimony regarding the value of the imported presses is required.
The Court of International Trade in a Feb. 14 order granted an injunction until the conclusion of litigation against the liquidation of two plaintiffs' mattress imports. The Department of Justice pushed back against that timeline. It urged an end date of April 30, the same end date as the first administrative review period of the antidumping duty order the plaintiffs are contesting. Judge Gary Katzmann said that the plaintiffs, Best Mattresses International and Rose Lion Furniture International, sufficiently showed a likelihood to succeed on the merits of the case and that they would be irreparably harmed without the indefinite injunction.
The Court of International Trade granted Turkish steel exporter Celik Halat ve Tel Sanayi's motions for judgment in two cases on the antidumping and countervailing duty investigations into prestressed concrete steel wire strand from Turkey. Celik challenges the Commerce Department's refusal to accept questionnaire responses that were filed 21 and 87 minutes late in the AD and CVD cases, respectively. Judge Timothy Stanceu said the rejections amounted to an abuse of discretion and imposed a "draconian penalty" on Celik for a "minor and inadvertent technical error by its counsel that had no appreciable effect on the" investigations.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
A customs broker license test taker filed suit at the Court of International Trade after two appeals of her final score on the Customs Broker License Examination failed to result in a passing grade. Filing the case without an attorney, Shuzhen Zhong wants the court to review the six questions she appealed to CBP, of which she only received credit for one upon reconsideration. Zhong took particular issue with CBP's getting both her address and gender wrong when returning the results of her appeal (Zhong v. United States, CIT #22-00041).
The Commerce Department reasonably derived the separate rate respondents' dumping margin in an antidumping duty investigation by averaging the mandatory respondents' zero percent and adverse facts available rates, petitioner Coalition for Fair Trade in Hardwood Plywood said in a Feb. 3 reply brief at the Court of International Trade. Responding to arguments made by the plaintiffs, led by Linyi Chengen Import and Export Co., Celtic Co. and Taraca Pacific, the coalition said that Commerce properly relied on the information laid out in the petition to derive the rates since it was already vetted by Commerce as part of the pre-initiation phase of the investigation (Linyi Chengen Import and Export Co. v. United States, CIT Consol. #18-00002).
The Court of International Trade granted Best Mattresses International Company and Rose Lion Furniture International Company an indefinite injunction against the liquidation of their mattress entries in a Feb. 14 order. The injunction bid faced opposition from the DOJ, which argued that the injunction should only run until April 30, 2022 -- the end date of the first administrative review of the AD order in question. The companies are plaintiffs in a challenge to the AD order on mattresses from Cambodia. Judge Gary Katzmann said that the injunction was justified since the plaintiffs showed a likelihood of irreparable harm and success on the merits of the case.
The effective dates of the Commerce Department's partial revocation of the antidumping and countervailing duties on solar cells from China ran contrary to the agency's stated practice, because they excluded unliquidated entries that weren't subject to the final results of an administrative review or automatic liquidation at the time, importer Source Global said in a Feb. 11 complaint at the Court of International Trade (Source Global, PBC v. United States, CIT #22-00009).
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that the entry of appearance for plaintiff-appellee PT. Kenertec Power System's counsel was not in compliance with the court's rules. In particular, the court said that the contact information for Daniel Robert Wilson and Kang Woo Lee of Arnold & Porter "does not match the information associated with the user's account." Up-to-date contact information is needed for the two attorneys, the court said. The case is an appeal by the Wind Tower Trade Coalition over a Court of International Trade decision that sustained the Commerce Department's decision to ultimately find no countervailable subsidization in a countervailing duty investigation of utility scale wind towers from Indonesia (PT. Kenertec Power System v. U.S., Fed. Cir. #22-1408).