The government can seek reclassification of an importer's merchandise in court at a higher duty rate, even when CBP did not previously pursue the rate increase against the importer, DOJ said in March 15 brief in support of its counterclaim in a tariff classification suit brought by Cyber Power -- which says the counterclaim sets a dangerous precedent (Cyber Power Systems (USA) Inc. v. United States, CIT #21-00200).

Two chainsaw chain and blade importers, TriLink Saw Chain and TriLink Global, agreed to pay $525,000 to settle allegations that the companies misclassified their imports, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Iowa said. The U.S. alleged that the importers purposely classified their chain saw chains and blades from September 2018 through June 2019 under the wrong Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading to avoid paying Section 301 China tariffs -- a violation of the False Claims Act.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied on March 16 U.S. pipe maker Welspun Tubular's motion for rehearing in a case on whether the Commerce Department can make a particular market situation adjustment to the sales-below-cost test when calculating normal value in an antidumping duty proceeding. The appellate court issued a two-page order denying the en banc rehearing motion without a further explanation (Hyundai Steel Company v. United States, Fed. Cir. #21-1748).

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.

Importer Root Sciences was denied on March 15 its motion for reconsideration of a Court of International Trade ruling that CBP's seizure of Root's imports precluded a deemed exclusion, stripping the court of jurisdiction over the case. Judge Gary Katzmann said that because the reconsideration motion "amounts to nothing more than a disagreement with the court’s reasoning on matters fully litigated, devoid of showing manifest error, it is insufficient to warrant reconsideration and is denied."

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit should affirm the Commerce Department's finding that Al Ghurair Iron & Steel circumvented the antidumping and countervailing duties on corrosion-resistant steel (CORE) products from China by way of transshipment via the United Arab Emirates, defendant-appellee Steel Dynamics said March 14 in a reply brief filed with the appeals court. The UAE company's processing was minor or insignificant, marked by a low level of investment in the UAE, Steel Dynamics said (Al Ghurair Iron & Steel v. United States, Fed. Cir. #22-1199).

The risk of court-annexed mediation in an antidumping duty case "far outweighs the benefit," defendant-intervenor GEO Specialty Chemicals said in a March 14 brief opposing plaintiff Nagase & Co.'s bid for mediation, telling the trade court that it "vigorously" opposes Nagase's claim that an alleged error in Nakase's AD rate is easily correctable (Nagase & Co. v. United States, CIT #21-00574).

July 6 marks the fourth anniversary of the List 1 Section 301 tariffs' taking effect on Chinese imports, and the 1974 Trade Act requires their expiration after four years, “unless some conditions are met,” said David Olave, a Sandler Travis associate and trade policy adviser, on a recent podcast. “No unilateral 301 action that I know has made it through the four years, so we’re about to witness trade policy procedural history,” he said.

The Commerce Department's rejection of three U.S. chloropicrin producers' filing in an antidumping duty sunset review -- which resulted in the revocation of the nearly 40-year-old order on chloropicrin from China -- was a "marked abuse of discretion" given that the producers' lawyer was impaired with "medical and technical issues," plaintiff-appellants, led by Trinity Manufacturing, said in a March 14 opening brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Trinity Manufacturing v. United States, Fed. Cir. #22-1329).

A Mexican factory that was shut down by the government doesn't need to include costs incurred during the time it was inoperative in the parent company's computed value calculations, CBP said in a newly released Jan. 7 ruling. The facility, which is owned by Chamberlain, was shut down in March 2020 by state authorities in Sonora, Mexico, as part of an emergency decree closing all nonessential businesses in response to COVID-19. CBP's ruling hinged on the fact that the costs incurred during the time of the government-mandated shutdown were "not employed in the production of the imported merchandise."