Counsel for importer Larson-Juhl US will proceed with the company's customs case alongside two cases from the relevant exporter, China Cornici Co., which is also represented by the same counsel. Submitting a joint status report to the Court of International Trade, Clark Hill attorneys said that they made the decision to allow the three cases to "proceed independently" instead of staying one of them following a meeting with the court in which Judge Stephen Vaden "asked the parties to reconsider the request to continue the stay and to discuss the order in which the three cases should proceed" (Larson-Juhl US v. United States, CIT # 23-00032).
The Commerce Department allegedly erred by not including countries producing like products as possible surrogates in its administrative review of the antidumping duty order on 1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane (R-134a) from China, the American HFC Coalition and some of its members -- Arkema, The Chemours Company, Honeywell International and Mexichem Fluor -- said in their Nov. 6 complaint at the Court of International Trade (The American HFC Coalition v. U.S., CIT # 23-00210).
The Commerce Department failed to adjust the export price for Chinese exporter Trina Solar and continued to use the "unreliable" price of Romanian glass over Trina's objections, the exporter argued in a Nov. 6 complaint to the Court of International Trade (Trina Solar v. U.S., CIT # 23-00213).
The Commerce Department continued to find that India was the appropriate primary surrogate country in its 16th administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain frozen fish fillets from Vietnam, it said in remand results filed Nov. 6 at the Court of International Trade (Catfish Farmers of America v. U.S., CIT # 21-00380)
Judges at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit questioned antidumping duty petitioner Wheatland Tube Co. and respondent Saha Thai Steel Pipe Public Co. during a Nov. 7 oral argument over Wheatland's claim that a Commerce Department scope ruling improperly excluded dual-stenciled pipe from the AD order on circular welded carbon steel pipes and tubes from Thailand (Saha Thai Steel Pipe Public Co. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 22-2181).
CBP abused its discretion by ignoring explicit antidumping and countervailing duty scope language when it found that importer and AD/CVD petitioner Pitts Enterprises evaded the AD/CVD orders on chassis and subassemblies thereof from China, Pitts argued in a Nov. 6 complaint at the Court of International Trade. The importer admitted to integrating Chinese axle and landing gear leg components into finished chassis shipments, which were finished in Vietnam, but it said individual Chinese components were "explicitly removed from the scope" (Pitts Enterprises v. U.S., CIT # 23-00234).
Nine new members have been appointed to the Court of International Trade's Rules Advisory Committee, the trade court announced on Nov. 3. Representing the different sections within the trade bar, the new members are DOJ's Sosun Bae and Luke Mathers; Jill Cramer of Mowry & Grimson; the Commerce Department's Emma Hunter; CBP's Tamari Lagvilava; Joshua Morey of Kelley Drye; Richard O'Neill of Neville Peterson; R. Will Planert of Morris Manning; and Devin Sikes of Akin Gump.
The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Importer Ditches Suit on Section 232 'Derivative' Duties After High Court Rejection in Separate Case
Importer Tempo Global Resources filed a stipulation of dismissal on Nov. 6 in its case on President Donald Trump's expansion of Section 232 steel and aluminum duties onto "derivative" products, after the Supreme Court declined to hear another case challenging the same presidential action. The Court of International Trade stayed Tempo Global's case in August pending the high court's resolution of the separate Section 232 case, PrimeSource Building Products v. U.S. (see 2308080024). The Supreme Court rejected PrimeSource's request for review at the end of October, despite the company's claims that the case could allow the court to decide how separation-of-powers principles apply to statutory interpretations delegating vast legislative power to the executive branch (see 2310300020) (Tempo Global Resources v. United States, CIT # 20-00066).
Products imported by Cozy Comfort are "pullovers" or "sweatshirts" not "blankets" or "other garments," DOJ said in a Nov. 3 motion for judgment in a tariff classification case at the Court of International Trade (Cozy Comfort Company v. U.S., CIT # 22-00173).