Neither importer Cyber Power Systems (USA) Inc. nor the U.S. succeeded in persuading the Court of International Trade that their side was right in a tiff over the country of origin for shipments of uninterruptible power supplies and a surge voltage protector. Judge Leo Gordon, in a Feb. 24 order, denied both parties' motions for judgment, ordering the litigants to pick dates on which to set up a trial.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit set April 6 as the date for oral argument in a key case on the use of first sale valuation for goods from nonmarket economies. In Meyer v. U.S., the Court of International Trade said that first sale treatment may not be applicable to NME exports (see 2103020040). Litigation is underway at the Federal Circuit over the question, with Meyer most recently arguing that the trade court improperly applied the "dual burden of proof" when denying the importer first sale since the court simply accepted CBP's move of valuing the imports based on their second sale price without scrutiny (see 2201190059) (Meyer Corporation v. U.S., Fed. Cir. #21-1932).
The argument that a Turkish duty drawback program fails to qualify for a drawback adjustment in an antidumping duty case disregards "decades of [Commerce Department] precedent" over the program, Turkish exporter Assan Aluminyum Sanayi ve Ticaret said in a Feb. 22 brief at the Court of International Trade. Responding to AD petitioner Aluminum Association Common Alloy Aluminum Sheet Trade Enforcement Working Group, Assan said that the Turkish Inward Processing Regime (IPR) has repeatedly been found by Commerce to be eligible for a duty drawback adjustment by passing the agency's two-prong analysis on drawback (Assan Aluminyum Sanayi ve Ticaret v. U.S., CIT #21-00246).
The Court of International Trade denied both importer Cyber Power Systems (USA) Inc.'s and the DOJ's motions for judgment in a case over the country of origin of Cyber Power's uninterruptible power supplies and surge voltage protector, ordering that the case go to trial. For these imports, many of their components came from China but were completed in the Philippines. Judge Leo Gordon said that the U.S. failed to show that the process in the Philippines constituted a "simple assembly" but also that Cyber Power failed to show that the goods were "substantially transformed" in the Philippines enough change their origin. The judge gave the parties until March 7 to submit a proposed scheduling order to lay out the next steps for a trial.
The Court of International Trade denied Wheatland Tube Company's bid for a preliminary injunction in a case seeking to compel CBP to respond to requests for information and a tariff classification ruling relating to Section 232 evasion since Wheatland has not shown a likelihood to succeed on the merits. CBP already responded to Wheatland's requests, so the plaintiff has not shown how it could succeed in the case, Judge Timothy Stanceu said.
The Court of International Trade denied Wheatland Tube Company's bid for a preliminary injunction in a case seeking to compel CBP to respond to requests for information relating to Section 232 evasion since Wheatland hasn't shown a likelihood to succeed on the merits. CBP already responded to Wheatland's requests for information and tariff classification ruling, so Wheatland hasn't shown how it could succeed in the case, Judge Timothy Stanceu said.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Commerce Department improperly withdrew a questionnaire issued to an antidumping duty and countervailing duty respondent, Repwire and Jin Tiong said in a pair of identical complaints filed Feb. 21 at the Court of International Trade. Commerce's subsequent refusal to accept Jin Tiong's questionnaire responses led the agency to then illegally apply an adverse facts available rate, the companies said (Repwire v. United States, CIT #22-00016) (Jin Tiong Electrical Materials Manufacturer v. United States, CIT #22-00023).
A Commerce Department scope ruling improperly found two-ply hardwood plywood falls under the antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders on hardwood plywood from China because the scope language clearly says that subject merchandise consists of a minimum of three plies, said three companies, Vietnam Finewood, Far East American and Liberty Woods, in a Feb. 18 complaint at the Court of International Trade (Vietnam Finewood Company Ltd. v. U.S., CIT #22-00049).