The U.S. urged the Supreme Court of the United States to reject importer PrimeSource Building Products' petition for a writ of certiorari in a case on the expansion of Section 232 duties onto "derivative" products, telling the high court that PrimeSource's separation of powers claims fall flat. While the importer said the case can give the court a chance to reconsider its approach to nondelegation, the government argued that, under the principle of stare decisis, the petitioner must identify a "special justification" for revisiting established law, which it has failed to do here (PrimeSource Building Products v. U.S., Sup. Ct. # 23-69).
Country of origin cases
The Supreme Court of the U.S. on Sept. 13 extended the deadline for exporter Oman Fasteners to file a petition for a writ of certiorari in its case on then-President Donald Trump's expansion of the Section 232 duties to include steel and aluminum "derivative" products. The company now has until Oct. 20 to file the brief. Oman Fasteners said it was in the process of filing its own petition to the high court following importer PrimeSource Building Products' petition in its suit on the tariff expansion.
A protest approval relied on in a customs complaint from importer Under the Weather wasn't a "prior interpretive ruling" that CBP had to publish and revoke under 19 U.S.C. § 1625(c)'s notice-and-comment procedures before issuing a headquarters ruling on pop-up tents, the U.S. argued. Filing a partial motion to dismiss, the government claimed that only "interpretive determinations with prospective effect" qualify for the statute's "procedural safegurads" (Under the Weather v. United States, CIT # 21-00211).
CBP's Office of Regulations and Rulings wrongly overturned an evasion finding against Dominican company Kingtom Aluminio by CBP's Trade Remedy and Law Enforcement Directorate, the Aluminum Extrusions Fair Trade Committee (AEFTC) said in its Sept. 20 reply brief at the Court of Intenrational Trade (Aluminum Extrusions Fair Trade Committee v. U.S., CIT # 22-00236).
Actuators used in automotive applications that were produced in Mexico from Chinese, Mexican, U.S. and Taiwanese components are correctly Mexican origin and shouldn't have been assessed Section 301 tariffs, importer Suprajit said in a Sept. 22 complaint at the Court of International Trade (Suprajit Controls v. U.S., CIT # 23-00181).
The U.S. filed a customs penalty lawsuit on Sept. 22 at the Court of International Trade against importer Rayson Global and its owner Doris Cheng, seeking a nearly $3.4 million penalty related to evaded antidumping and Section 301 duties on uncovered mattress innersprings from China. The complaint says the imports were transshipped from China through Thailand to avoid the duties (United States v. Rayson Global, CIT # 23-00201).
The Commerce Department correctly found on remand that importer Valeo North America's T-series aluminum sheet fell within the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on aluminum sheet from China, DOJ said in its Sept. 20 comments in support of the remand redetermination (Valeo North America v. U.S., CIT # 21-00581).
The scope of the U.S. government's remand request in an Enforce and Protect Act case in light of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's ruling in Royal Brush Manufacturing v. U.S. is "not appropriate," plaintiffs led by Newtrend USA Co. said in a Sept. 18 reply brief. The government didn't say whether on remand it will put on the record "the exculpatory documents that Plaintiffs" gave to CBP during verification that the agency "refused to allow in the original proceeding," nor did it say whether it would allow additional briefing on those materials, the brief said (Newtrend USA Co. v. United States, CIT # 22-00347).
The Court of International Trade on Sept. 20 upheld the Commerce Department's decision on remand to include importer SMA Surface's Twilight product within the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on quartz surface products from China. Judge Gary Katzmann said that SMA Surfaces waived its challenge to the remand, which said the product doesn't qualify for the crushed glass surface product exclusion, by failing to present developed arguments in response to the remand decision.
The International Trade Commission failed to support its "central" underselling analysis as part of the injury investigation on phosphate fertilizers from Morocco and Russia, the Court of International Trade ruled in a Sept. 19 opinion. Judge Stephen Vaden said that since the commission's underselling theory "undergirds" the remaining statutory considerations in the proceeding -- volume, price and impact -- the ITC must revisit its findings on these factors as well should it continue to find that the imports were undersold. The underselling theory "contaminat[ed]" these remaining findings, the opinion said.