The Court of International Trade denied a motion to stay in a challenge to the all-others rate in a countervailing duty administrative review until a decision is made on a motion to dismiss the case. Denying the motion from petitioner Dexstar Wheel in a text order, Judge Mark Barnett ordered that a joint proposed briefing schedule be submitted by close of business on Feb. 15. Rimco filed the lawsuit challenging the Commerce Department's all-others rate in the countervailing duty review of steel wheels 12 to 16.5 inches in diameter from China. Dexstar argued that Commerce did not actually set an all-others rate in the review since the only two respondents for which rates were given received the China-wide adverse facts available rate. The petitioner moved to dismiss the case for failure to state a claim (see 2201250070) (Rimco v. United States, CIT #21-00588).

A respondent in an antidumping duty investigation says Commerce's failure to conduct on-site verification cost it the opportunity to correct deficiencies in questionnaires sent by the agency instead, causing the respondent, Asia Pacific Fibers, to get a total adverse facts available AD rate, the company said in a Feb. 14 complaint at the Court of International Trade (PT. Asia Pacific Fibers TBK v. United States, CIT #22-00007).

The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed a California district court ruling dismissing a case brought by investors in U.S. semiconductor developer Qualcomm over an alleged scheme by the American company to illegally block Singapore firm Broadcom's bid to take over Qualcomm. Investors had argued Qualcomm had improperly lobbied lawmakers and the Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S. to block the acquisition.

The Commerce Department complied with the Court of International Trade's remand instructions when it found that certain door thresholds qualify for the "finished merchandise" exclusion from the antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders on aluminum extrusions from China, the Justice Department said in a pair of Feb. 14 reply briefs. Filing its responses in two separate cases, one brought by Columbia Aluminum Products and the other by Worldwide Door Components, Commerce said that it relied on CIT's rulings to find that the plaintiffs' door thresholds qualified for the finished merchandise exclusion while ignoring prior authorities that established that a subassembly could not qualify for the exclusion (Worldwide Door Components v. United States, CIT #19-00012) (Columbia Aluminum Products v. United States, CIT # 19-00013).

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit should not grant a stay of proceedings in a lawsuit challenging the Commerce Department's particular market situation in an antidumping duty sales-below-cost test because the defendants seeking the stay haven't shown they're likely to succeed in the case, plaintiff-appellees Dong-A Steel Co. and Kukje Steel Co. said in a Feb. 14 brief. A trio of defendant-appellants -- Atlas Tube, Searing Industries and Nucor Tubular Products -- had requested a stay while the Federal Circuit wraps up another case wherein Welspun Tubular requested a full court rehearing over an identical question, but the Federal Circuit is unlikely to grant the rehearing or overturn its earlier decision, Dong-A and Kukje said (Dong-A Steel Company v. United States, Fed. Cir. #21-2153).

Aida and the Department of Justice are seeking testimony from three Italian employees of Aida who possess specialized knowledge required in an ongoing case at the Court of International Trade concerning the proper value of six industrial stamping presses, they said in a joint request to Judge Stephen Vaden asking him to issue an order appointing a commissioner authorized to take testimony in Italy and to issue a Letter of Request to Aida's and DOJ's local counsels in Italy. In its initial complaint, Aida claimed that CBP liquidated two entries based on incorrect appraisal by Aida's customs broker in 2015. Aida challenged the appraised value of the items via a protest, which was denied in 2018. In order to move forward with the case, both Aida and DOJ agree that testimony regarding the value of the imported presses is required.

The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:

The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:

The U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska permitted an amicus brief to be filed in a case brought by two shipping companies contesting hefty Jones Act penalties over their shipments of fish from Alaska to the East Coast of the U.S. The brief from logistics company Lineage Logistics Holdings was permitted despite opposition from the Department of Justice, which argued that the brief does not raise any new issues (Kloosterboer International Forwarding LLC v. United States, D. Alaska #3:21-00198).