A former oil and commodities trader at Vitol Inc., Javier Aguilar Morales, was charged with violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act by bribing Mexican officials to obtain and retain business for Vitol. According to the indictment filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas on Aug. 3, Aguilar violated the FCPA via bribery and money laundering from 2017 to 2020 to keep business for Vitol with the Mexican state-owned oil company, Petroleos Mexicanos (PEMEX), and its subsidiary, PEMEX Procurement International (United States v. Javier Aguilar, S.D. Tex. #4:23-00335).

No lawsuits have been filed recently at the Court of International Trade.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued an errata in its Royal Brush Manufacturing v. U.S. opinion. The court removed the word "not" from the sentence that originally read, "The government nonetheless argues that confidential business information cannot not be disclosed absent a statute or regulation authorizing a protective order." In the opinion, the appellate court said that CBP violated importer Royal Brush's due process rights by failing to provide it access to business confidential information in an Enforce and Protect Act proceeding (see 2307270038).

The Court of International Trade in an Aug. 4 notice granted importer Viking Drill & Tool's bid to dismiss its customs suit concerning its high-speed drill rods. The importer claimed in its summons that CBP illegally denied its protest, which said the rods of Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 7228.10.0030 were granted Section 232 steel and aluminum duty exclusions but were still assessed the duties (Viking Drill & Tool v. United States, CIT # 22-00058).

Exporter Pirelli Tyre Co. will appeal a Court of International Trade decision finding that Pirelli failed to rebut the presumption of Chinese government control in the 2017-18 review of the antidumping duty order on passenger vehicle and light truck tires from China. According to the notice of appeal, the exporter will take the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In the opinion, the trade court said there isn't a different standard of proof for rebutting the presumption of government control in antidumping proceedings based on the degree of the foreign state's ownership stake in a respondent (see 2306120055) (Pirelli Tyre Co. v. United States, CIT # 20-00115).

The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:

The Supreme Court of the U.S., in an Aug. 1 order, granted the government's bid for an additional month to reply to importer PrimeSource Building Products' petition for a writ of certiorari on President Donald Trump's expansion of Section 232 duties onto steel and aluminum "derivatives." The government's reply will now be due Sept. 25, instead of Aug. 24 as originally planned. The government said its heavy case load warranted the delay.

The Commerce Department improperly found that lemon juice exporter Louis Dreyfus Co. (LDC) was not affiliated with its primary fresh lemon supplier, leading to a de minimis rate for LDC, petitioner Ventura Coastal argued in its Aug. 3 motion for judgment at the Court of International Trade. The petitioner said Commerce discussed only LDC's potential reliance on the supplier, whose name was redacted in the brief, but failed to consider the supplier's reliance on LDC, misapplying the legal standard (Ventura Coastal v. U.S., CIT # 23-00009).

Importer Eteng Technologies Aug. 2 moved to dismiss its customs suit at the Court of International Trade related to its shipments of backpacking tents. The company challenged CBP's classification of the tents under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 6302.22.90, dutiable at 8.8%, claiming that they should be classified under subheading 6306.22.10, free of duty. John Peterson, counsel for Eteng, said in an email that he realized the duties were not paid before the case was filed, which would have led the suit being tossed for lack of jurisdiction (Eteng Technologies v. United States, CIT # 22-00167).

The Court of International Trade erred when it signed off on the Commerce Department's refusal to conduct a full administrative review of and apply adverse facts available to exporter Jin Tiong Electrical Materials Manufacturer despite issuing a questionnaire, importer Repwire and Jin Tiong said in an Aug. 3 opening brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Repwire v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1933).