DOJ and steel importer NLMK Pennsylvania are awaiting word from the U.S. "settlement authority" regarding NLMK's Section 232 steel and aluminum tariff exclusion case after the parties agreed to a settlement in principle, they said Jan. 2. The Court of International Trade gave the government and NLMK another stay in the case, granting them 30 additional days to file another status report (NLMK Pennsylvania v. United States, CIT # 21-00507).
U.S. solar cell maker Auxin Solar and solar module designer Concept Clean Energy launched a lawsuit at the Court of International Trade on Dec. 29 to contest the Commerce Department's pause of antidumping and countervailing duties on crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells and modules from Southeast Asian found to be circumventing the AD/CVD orders on these products from China (Auxin Solar v. U.S., CIT # 23-00274).
The following lawsuits were filed recently at the Court of International Trade:
Commerce’s countervailing duty for a Moroccan phosphate fertilizer exporter was too low because it either ignored or underestimated several benefits, a domestic petitioner said Dec 28 in the Court of International Trade (The Mosaic Company v. U.S., CIT # 23-00246).
Indian exporter Kumar Industries took to the Court of International Trade to contest the adverse facts available rate it received for purportedly failing to cooperate to the best of its ability in the 2021-22 review of the antidumping duty order on glycine from India. Filing a complaint on Jan. 1, Kumar said Commerce erred in using AFA due to the noncooperation of two entities which the agency said were related to Kumar (Kumar Industries v. United States, CIT # 23-00263).
The South Korean government's provision of port usage rights to exporter Hyundai Steel Co. is not a countervailable benefit since it is the repayment of a debt, Hyundai told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a Dec. 29 opening brief. Because the port usage rights allowed Hyundai to "recoup its costs" from building the Incheon North Harbor port, the rights did not provide a "gift-like transfer of funds that provided an advantage or profit to Hyundai Steel," the brief said (Hyundai Steel Co. v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 24-1100).
International trade attorney Lucas Queiroz Pires is leaving Alston & Bird, according to a notice filed at the Court of International Trade. Pires joined Alston & Bird in 2018 and worked as an associate in the international trade and regulatory practice at the firm, according to his LinkedIn profile.
Importers of cannabis-related goods should seek customs rulings to "interpret the laws of every State that has repealed prior prohibitions" pertaining to cannabis paraphernalia to better facilitate the importation of these goods, law firm Neville Peterson said in a blog post.
Correction: The Court of International Trade issued 191 decisions in 2006 (see 2312280038), a pace it equaled in 2023 with a decision issued Dec. 29 in Navneet Education v. U.S.
Big box retailer Target Corp. asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit for more time to file its reply brief in its suit against the Court of International Trade's decision to order reliquidation of Target's entries that erroneously received a favorable antidumping duty rate. While the brief is currently due on Jan. 5, 2024, Target asked if it could submit its arguments on Jan. 19 "due largely to the circumstances of the holidays" (Target Corp. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-2274).