The Court of International Trade upheld the Commerce Department's decision to rescind the 2019 reviews of the antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders on aluminum extrusions from China with regard to exporter Kingtom Aluminio following CBP's decision to reverse its finding that Kingtom evaded the orders.
The Court of International Trade doesn't have jurisdiction to hear importer Eteros Technologies USA's case against CBP's alleged retaliation against the company for its success at the trade court regarding the admissibility of its marijuana trimmers, the U.S. said. Filing a reply brief last week in support of its motion to dismiss the case, the government argued that Eteros' case doesn't challenge the "administration and enforcement" of an import transaction" (Eteros Technologies USA v. United States, CIT # 25-00036).
The Court of International Trade on July 11 upheld the Commerce Department's decision to grant exporter East Sea Seafoods a separate antidumping duty rate in the 2019-20 review of the AD order on catfish from Vietnam. Judge M. Miller Baker also upheld Commerce's decision to base exporter Green Farms' separate rate on a simple average of respondent NTSF Seafood's zero percent margin and East Sea's adverse facts available rate.
CBP properly found that importers American Pacific Plywood, InterGlobal Forest and U.S. Global Forest evaded the antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders on plywood from China via Cambodian producer LB Wood, the Court of International Trade held on July 9. Judge M. Miller Baker sustained the evasion determination over a host of legal, procedural and factual claims made by InterGlobal.
The Court of International Trade's Pacer.gov system will undergo maintenance on July 13 between 5 a.m. and 4 p.m., the court said. Users looking to log on to CM/ECF or make payments through Pay.gov "may experience intermittent issues" during that time, the court said.
The Court of International Trade on July 8 dismissed importer PPG Industries' case against the International Trade Commission's affirmative injury determination on epoxy resins from China, India, South Korea, Taiwan and Thailand, for lack of prosecution. No complaint was filed within the statutorily prescribed period. Counsel for PPG didn't immediately respond to a request for comment (PPG Industries v. United States, CIT # 25-00101).
CBP erred when it applied a double substantial transformation test to importer JBF Bahrain's inputs when treaty language explicitly instructed it to use an alternative, JBF argued July 2 (JBF Bahrain v. United States, CIT # 23-00067).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit set the oral argument date regarding two appeals against the legality of President Donald Trump's tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act for Sept. 17. The 9th Circuit will be the second circuit court to hear arguments on the validity of the tariffs following the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on July 31 (see 2506100076) (State of California v. Trump, 9th Cir. # 25-3493) (Susan Webber v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 9th Cir. # 25-2717).
The Supreme Court's recent decision in Trump v. CASA limiting the ability for lower courts to issue nationwide injunctions doesn't affect the Court of International Trade's permanent injunction against President Donald Trump's executive orders implementing tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, 12 U.S. states told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on July 8. The states, led by Oregon, argued in a reply brief that the trade court's injunction, which applied to parties not part of the lawsuit against the tariffs, is necessary to afford the states complete relief (V.O.S. Selections v. Donald J. Trump, Fed. Cir. # 25-1812).
The Court of International Trade on July 9 sustained CBP's finding that importers American Pacific Plywood, InterGlobal Forest and U.S. Global Forest evaded the antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders on plywood from China through Cambodian manufacturer LB Wood. Judge M. Miller Baker held that all that's required for liability to attach under the Enforce and Protect Act is "the entry of covered merchandise through any material false statement or material omission that avoids antidumping and countervailing duties, except those resulting from clerical errors," noting that even clerical errors are evasion if they are "part of a pattern of negligent conduct." The judge also held that CBP isn't precluded from finding that shipments from LB Wood are of Chinese origin in light of two other CIT cases the agency settled in which it said shipments from LB Wood are of Cambodian origin. Baker said the doctrine of judicial estoppel doesn't apply here, however, since CBP didn't succeed in advancing a position "directly inconsistent" with its theory in the present case, given that its initial position in the two settled cases was identical to its position here "but it then ran up the white flag."