The Court of International Trade ruled that the U.S. can't file a counterclaim in a customs case brought by Second Nature Designs, according to a July 25 order by Judge Gary Katzmann (Second Nature Designs v. U.S., CIT #21-00271).

The Court of International Trade should circumvent the remand process and order the Commerce Department to grant exclusions to Section 232 steel and aluminum duties, steel company NLMK Pennsylvania argued in a July 22 brief. Likening its experience with the exclusion process at Commerce to "a bad remake of Groundhog Day," the plaintiff argued that Commerce has repeatedly ignored the record evidence which plainly shows that the U.S. companies do not have the capacity to fill NLMK's requests (NLMK Pennsylvania v. United States, CIT #21-00507).

Zhe "John" Liu and GL Paper Distribution owe the U.S. nearly $1 million for evading antidumping duties on steel wire hangers from China by transshipping the wire hangers through Malaysia, the U.S. argued in a July 21 complaint at the Court of International Trade. Alleging that Liu and GL Paper negligently avoided paying the duties, the U.S. took to the trade court to seek payment of the penalties, which equals the domestic value of the steel wire hanger entries made by GL Paper in 2017 (The United States v. Zhe "John" Liu, CIT #22-00215).

The U,S, Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit needs to reconsider its dismissal of a broad challenge to President Donald Trump's Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs, plaintiff-appellants in the case, led by USP Holdings, argued in a July 22 motion for reconsideration. The plaintiff-appellants said that the court "failed to consider" the effect of the Administrative Procedure Act on the standard of review issue when finding that the scope of judicial review given to the Commerce Secretary's determination of threat to impair national security was identical to that given to the president, whose findings are not subject to the APA (USP Holdings v. United States, Fed. Cir. #21-1726).

The Commerce Department in July 20 remand results submitted to the Court of International Trade stuck by its methodology used to calculate profit for the constructed value of antidumping duty respondent Building Systems de Mexico (BSM). Commerce also dropped the use of adverse facts available for one unreportable sale, used the date of substantial completion of a fabricated structural steel (FSS) project as the date of sale rather than the date of the purchase order or sales order acknowledgment, and didn't exclude the operating results of the business unit in question from the calculation of the constructed export price profit rate (Building Systems de Mexico v. U.S., CIT #20-00069).

The Court of International Trade in a July 20 opinion redenominated the U.S.'s counterclaim in a customs case brought by importer Cyber Power Systems as a defense, ruling that the U.S. does not have the statutory authority to make the counterclaim. With the ruling, Judge Claire Kelly denied Cyber Power's motion to dismiss the counterclaim as moot. Kelly ruled that none of the sections in the U.S. code cited by the U.S. give a basis for the counterclaim, which sought to reclassify imported cables.

CBP illegally found that importers American Pacific Plywood Inc. (APPI), Far East American and Liberty Woods International evaded the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on hardwood plywood from China by transshipping their goods through Vietnam, the importers argued in two July 20 complaints at the Court of International Trade. The importers' six- and 10-count complaints against CBP over its Enforce and Protect Act investigation include claims the agency illegally initiated the investigation, violated the importers' due process rights and improperly found that all of its imports were covered merchandise (Far East American v. United States, CIT #22-00213) (American Pacific Plywood Inc. v. U.S., CIT #22-00214).

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.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in a July 19 opinion denied Hong Kong-based apparel company Changji Esquel Textile's (CJE) bid for a preliminary injunction against its placement on the Commerce Department's Entity List, calling it "a Hail Mary pass." Judges Judith Rogers, Patricia Millett and Gregory Katsas held that CJE's claims that human rights violations are not proper grounds to be placed on the Entity List are not likely to succeed, upholding the district court's ruling saying the same thing.

The Commerce Department in July 18 remand results submitted to the Court of International Trade found that there was insufficient evidence to deny antidumping respondent Z.A. Sea Foods Private Limited's (ZASF) Vietnam sales for use in calculating normal value. In the AD case, Commerce rejected ZASF's third-country sales to Vietnam for allegedly ending up in the U.S. to evade the relevant AD order -- this position was sent back by the trade court. On remand, the agency used the Vietnamese sales to calculate normal value, ending on a 1.73% dumping rate for ZASF (Z.A. Sea Foods Private Limited v. United States, CIT Consol. #21-00031).