The Court of International Trade's Pay.gov system will undergo maintenance Aug. 16 from 6 p.m. to 10 p.m. EDT, the court announced. Documents requiring payment with this system can't be filed on CM/ECF during this time.
Gary Barnes, the pro se litigant challenging President Donald Trump's tariffs, responded on Aug. 11 to the government's opposition to his motion for reconsideration of the Court of International Trade's decision to dismiss the case for lack of standing. Barnes argued that his amendment to his original complaint helps establish that he has suffered a direct injury from the tariffs (Barnes v. United States, CIT # 25-00043).
CBP improperly interpreted the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on oil country tubular goods (OCTG) from China when it found that 10 importers evaded the orders, importer LE Commodities argued in an Aug. 13 complaint at the Court of International Trade. During the evasion proceeding, CBP said that the China-origin hollow steel billets used by Thai manufacturer Petroleum Equipment (Thailand) Co. to make the subject OCTG were "unfinished OCTG" subject to the orders (LE Commodities v. United States, CIT # 25-00181).
No lawsuits were filed recently at the Court of International Trade.
The Court of International Trade sided with the government in a customs case on food producer BASF Corporation's Betatene, in a confidential Aug. 13 decision. Judge Lisa Wang gave parties until Aug. 29 to review the confidential information in the decision, saying she plans to issue a public version of the decision on or before Sept. 12. The U.S. argued that the Betatene, which is formulated from beta-carotene, is a dietary supplement under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 2106 (see 2501150089). BASF argued that the goods should have been classified under heading 2936 as a "general-use 'provitamin'" (BASF Corporation v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 12-00422).
Target General Merchandise's string light models are properly classified under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 9405 as lamps with a "permanently fixed light source" not specified elsewhere in the tariff schedule and not under heading 8543 as parts of electrical machines having individual functions not specified elsewhere in the chapter, the Court of International Trade held on Aug. 13. Judge Lisa Wang ruled that Target's seven models of string lights specifically fall under subheading 9405.30.00 as lighting sets "of a kind used for Christmas trees.”
The Court of International Trade on Aug. 11 upheld the Commerce Department's 2021-22 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells from China in a confidential decision. Judge Mark Barnett gave the parties until Aug. 18 to review the confidential information in the decision. In the case, exporter Yingli Energy argued that the trade court should strike down the Commerce Department's ordinary presumption that exporters in non-market economies are under foreign government control, urging the court to undertake a Loper Bright analysis of the AD statute (see 2506050001) (Yingli Energy (China) Co. v. U.S, CIT # 24-00131).
The Court of International Trade on Aug. 12 sent back the Commerce Department's 2021 administrative review of the countervailing duty order on cut-to-length carbon-quality steel plate from South Korea in a confidential decision. Judge Claire Kelly gave the parties until Aug. 18 to review the confidential information in the decision. The suit was brought by exporter Hyundai Steel to contest Commerce's specificity finding regarding the provision of subsidized electricity (see 2505270004). Kelly previously remanded the review after finding that the agency didn't provide a "rational basis" for its de facto specificity finding (see 2412170041). Commerce initially said the Korean steel industry was one of four apparently unrelated industries out of 10 that, together, were the four biggest users of the off-peak electricity program. On remand, the agency switched its grouping to only three industries (Hyundai Steel Co. v. U.S, CIT # 23-00211).
The Commerce Department on Aug. 11 clarified the basis it used for applying adverse facts available against respondent Saha Thai Steel Pipe in the 2020-21 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on circular welded carbon and steel pipes and tubes from Thailand. Submitting its remand results to the Court of International Trade, Commerce said it reconsidered Saha Thai and BNK Steel Co.'s affiliation status and found that the two are affiliated based on AFA (Saha Thai Steel Pipe Public Co. v. U.S., CIT # 21-00627).
Conservative advocacy group New Civil Liberties Alliance filed a motion for judgment and opposed motions to stay and transfer its newest case, brought before the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas on behalf of outdoor cooking products maker FireDisc and other importers to challenge President Donald Trump’s International Emergency Economic Powers Act tariffs (FIREDISC, Inc. v. Donald J. Trump, W.D. Tex. # 25-01134).