The Court of International Trade in an Aug. 1 order granted a joint motion for stipulated judgment, granting refunds to importer Transpacific Steel for Section 232 steel and aluminum duties paid in error. The importer was originally granted three exclusions with the wrong Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading listed in them. After having its resubmitted exclusion requests denied, Transpacific took to the trade court to seek the exclusions and refunds for the Section 232 duties paid. It received just that following a settlement with the U.S. (Transpacific Steel v. United States, CIT #21-00362).

DOJ asked the Court of International Trade in an Aug. 1 motion on behalf of the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative for permission to correct the administrative record in the Section 301 litigation to include 136 pages of documents not previously submitted in the cases. Virtually all the documents previously were in the public domain, and they include mostly news releases and Federal Register notices announcing USTR actions connected with the imposition of the four rounds of Section 301 tariffs on Chinese imports dating to 2018.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in a July 29 judgment dismissed ship reseller Crocus Investments's claim against Marine Transport Logistics' high storage fees. The court ruled that the Federal Maritime Commission appropriately changed its interpretation of 46 U.S.C. Section 41102(c), which bars certain ocean transportation industry members for failing to enforce reasonable regulations relating to storing property. The new interpretation says that a party is only liable for violations of this rule occurring on a continued basis and not a one-off mishap (Crocus Investments v. Federal Maritime Commission, D.C. Cir. #21-1199).

Ellwood City Forge Company is attempting to relitigate a case without offering anything new through its bid for reconsideration at the Court of International Trade, defendent-intervenor Metalcam said in a July 29 opposition brief (Ellwood City Forge Company, et al. v. United States, CIT #21-00073).

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a July 28 opinion held that CBP timely liquidated or reliquidated 10 entries of wooden bedroom furniture. The court ruled that the first unambiguous indication that an injunction against liquidation had ended came from liquidation instructions from the Commerce Department that were sent within the six months prior to liquidation, making the liquidation of the entries timely.

Angela Ellard, a deputy director-general of the World Trade Organization, called on WTO member governments to deposit instruments of acceptance with the multilateral trade organization to help the recently negotiated fishery subsidies agreement enter into force. Speaking at a virtual Washington International Trade Association event July 28, Ellard laid out the path ahead for the full adoption of the fisheries agreement while reflecting on steps the WTO looks to take on helping countries fully implement the obligations tied into the agreement. The DDG also spoke of a fund provided for in the agreement which will help less developed countries with the notification and transparency elements of the deal.

The Commerce Department violated the law by hitting consolidated antidumping duty respondents Apiario Diamante Comercial Esportadora and Apiario Diamante Producao e Comercial de Mel (collectively Supermel) with total adverse facts available, the respondent argued in a July 27 complaint at the Court of International Trade. Commerce unlawfully used unaffiliated beekeepers to verify Supermel's data, despite the fact that Supermel was the mandatory respondent and not the beekeepers, the complaint said (Apiario Diamante Comercial Exportadora Ltda. v. United States, CIT #22-00185).

The Department of Commerce made multiple errors in calculating the duty margin in an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on antifriction bearings from China, Tainai said in a July 26 motion at the Court of International Trade (Shanghai Tainai Bearing Co., Ltd. and C&U Americans, LLC v United States, CIT #22-0038).

The country of origin of certain surgical gowns imported by Global Resources International and Santé USA is the Dominican Republic and not the U.S. for the purposes of government procurement, CBP said in a final determination. Since the most important assembly or manufacturing processes in the production of the gowns took place in the Dominican Republic and not the U.S., the country of origin is the Dominican Republic, CBP said. The agency then directed the importers to consult with the relevant government procuring agency to find whether the gowns qualify as "U.S.-made end products" for the Federal Acquisition Regulation.

Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.