The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The following lawsuit was filed recently at the Court of International Trade:
Another ball bearings exporter threw its complaint into the ring March 5 to contest a recent antidumping duty administrative review. It alleged that the Commerce Department unnecessarily applied partial adverse facts available and needlessly conducted a pricing differential analysis for the mandatory respondent (Zhejiang Jingli Bearing Technology Co. v. U.S., CIT # 24-00038).
DOJ attorney Melissa Patterson withdrew from the massive Section 301 case at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, according to a March 1 notice. Patterson, who has worked as an assistant director to the solicitor general since 2019, joined the case in November (see 2311200046) (HMTX Industries v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1891).
The U.S. in a Feb. 27 motion defended its decision to calculate energy costs for a review's mandatory respondent directly, rather than as part of the respondent's selling, general and administrative costs, saying that the calculation was made more accurate because the Commerce Department had been given better information from a surrogate than it had ever received before (Neimenggu Fufeng Biotechnologies Co. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00068).
The following lawsuits were filed recently at the Court of International Trade:
Importer Sterling Products, doing business as Auxiliaries Group, voluntarily dismissed its customs suit at the Court of International Trade on its chillers and parts of shredders and granulators. CBP classified the chillers under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 8418.69.0180, along with Section 301 duties under secondary subheading 9903.88.01, and the parts of shredders and granulators under subheading 8479.90.9496, along with Section 301 duties under secondary subheading 9903.88.01. The importer said the goods are free of the Section 301 duties under secondary subheadings 9903.88.10 and 9903.88.07, respectively (Sterling Products d/b/a ACS Auxiliaries Group v. U.S., CIT # 20-03877).
The Court of International Trade on Feb. 22 again remanded the Commerce Department's use of total adverse facts available against exporter Meihua and its affiliate in an antidumping duty review on xanthan gum from China. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves said Meihua properly submitted information on the duties it paid, and its submission of its data 56 days before the antidumping review's preliminary results wasn't "untimely."
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Exporter Shanghai Tainai Bearing Co. and importer C&U Americas brought a suit to the Court of International Trade on Feb. 20 challenging the 2021-22 review of the antidumping duty order on tapered roller bearings from China. The five-count complaint alleges a host of errors in the review, including on Commerce's use of partial adverse facts available (Shanghai Tainai Bearing Co. v. United States, CIT # 24-00025).