The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
CBP's finding that Skyview Cabinet evaded antidumping and countervailing duties on wooden cabinets and vanities from China was unsupported by evidence and based on hearsay, and improperly added full supply chain assessment requirements, the importer told the Court of International Trade in a March 10 complaint (Skyview Cabinet USA v. United States, CIT #22-00080).
"Virtually every substantial issue" raised by plaintiffs in an antidumping duty challenge led by Ellwood City Forge Company still remains following a voluntary remand proceeding from the Commerce Department, the plaintiffs argued in a revised March 11 motion for judgment at the Court of International Trade. In particular, Ellwood argued Commerce's remand left unaddressed the issue of Commerce's failure to conduct verification in the antidumping duty investigation on forged steel end blocks from India (Ellwood City Forge Company v. United States, CIT #21-00007).
No lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade.
A nitrogen oxide sensor probe for diesel engines should be classified as an instrument of chemical analysis under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 9027, rather than an instrument of measurement under heading 9026, DOJ said in a brief filed March 8 at the Court of International Trade. DOJ argued that the probe's function falls within the definition of "chemical analysis" and that the sensor itself includes design features that meet plain language definitions of chemical analysis.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Court of International Trade sent back the Commerce Department's remand results in a case on the 2017-18 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on welded carbon steel standard pipes and tubes from India, in a March 11 confidential order. In a letter on the opinion, Judge Claire Kelly announced her intention to release the public version of the opinion on March 21, giving litigants until March 18 to review any bracketed information (Garg Tube Export v. United States, CIT #20-00026).
CBP erred when making its finding that importer CEK Group evaded the antidumping duty order on steel wire garment hangers from China by transshipping them through Thailand, CEK said in a March 11 complaint at the Court of International Trade. Among other things, CEK alleged in its 12-count complaint that CBP failed to address all of the arguments raised by the importer, made its decision without substantial evidence of transshipment and improperly refused to grant CEK access to business confidential information in the case (CEK Group v. United States, CIT #22-00082).
The Commerce Department cannot hit a countervailing duty respondent with adverse facts available relating to its alleged use of China's Export Buyer's Credit Program since there's no gap on the record over the respondent's EBCP usage, respondent Wuxi Tianran Photovoltaic Co. said in a March 9 brief at the Court of International Trade. Tianran's U.S. customers properly verified that they did not use the EBCP, the brief said (Wuxi Tianran Photovoltaic Co. v. United States, CIT Consol. #21-00538).
The Court of International Trade should deny the U.S.'s motion to dismiss a case from Wheatland Tube Co. seeking to compel CBP to respond to requests for information and a tariff classification ruling, Wheatland said in a March 9 reply brief. DOJ had said the trade court should toss the case, in part, since it already responded to the RFI and petition for a tariff classification. Wheatland disagreed, arguing that CBP's limited response failed to meet the requirements of Section 1516 which mandates that CBP "furnish the classification and the rate of duty imposed upon designated imported merchandise" (Wheatland Tube Company v. United States, CIT #22-00004).