Ninestar Says Not Exhausting Remedies By Petitioning for UFLPA Entity List Removal

Chinese cartridge exporter Ninestar Corp. told the Court of International Trade in a July 26 reply brief that it's not attempting to "exhaust its remedies" before the Forced Labor Enforcement Task Force by requesting removal from the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act Entity List. Responding to the government's bid to dismiss the case, Ninestar said it's merely asking FLETF to "take a new agency action, based on a different legal standard and a different evidentiary record" (Ninestar Corp. v. United States, CIT # 23-00182).

In moving to dismiss Ninestar's case challenging the UFLPA Entity List's addition of the company, the U.S. had said the case will become moot once FLETF makes a decision on Ninestar's request for removal. The exporter said this isn't correct since a case only is mooted once it becomes "impossible for a court to grant any effectual relief."

This won't be the case if FLETF denies the delisting request, since Ninestar would still be on the Entity List. The trade court would then "still be able to grant effectual relief by vacating the initial listing decision or enjoining Defendants to remove Ninestar from the list," the exporter said.

The U.S. also said Ninestar has taken more than one year since its first listing to prepare for the removal request. The exporter said this is also "wrong," since seeking removal before the task force would have been a "necessarily speculative, illogical, and useless task," given that "FLETF gave Ninestar no insight into the basis for its decision," the brief said.

Previously in the case, the trade court denied Ninestar's motion for a PI against its designation on the Entity List, though it said the company didn't need to exhaust its administrative remedies before FLETF (see 2402290081).