The U.S. moved for a voluntary remand at the Court of International Trade to reconsider its decision to reject importer LE Commodities' requests for exclusions from Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs. The government said it will "ensure that it appropriately addresses the record evidence" on remand. LE Commodities assented to the remand bid (LE Commodities v. United States, CIT # 23-00220).
Even if the public can deduce some trends or information about a company's confidential product information from publicly available sources, that doesn't "negate the confidential nature of the information submitted" as part of an International Trade Commission investigation, the ITC told the Court of International Trade on May 8 (OCP v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 21-00219).
A domestic catfish producer and petitioner brought a case to the Court of International Trade on May 9 contesting the Commerce Department’s 2020-21 review of frozen fish fillets from Vietnam. The petitioner is currently involved in ongoing litigation regarding the department’s 2019-20 review (see 2403280061) (Catfish Farmers of America v. U.S., CIT # 24-00082).
The Court of International Trade last week granted exporter Red Sun Energy Long An Co.'s motion to supplement the record after the company noted the Commerce Department "omitted several critical pieces of information from the official certified copy" of the record in the 2023 anti-circumvention inquiry on solar cells from Vietnam it filed with the court (Red Sun Energy Long An Co. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00229).
A status report on Chinese steel exporter Ninestar’s request to be taken off the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act Entity List (see 2404150051) is due on June 3, Court of International Trade Judge Gary Katzmann said in a May 8 scheduling order. Briefing on the exporter’s motion for judgment will remain stayed until further court order (Ninestar Corp. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00182).
The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Court of International Trade on May 6 granted importer van Gelder's motion to set aside the dismissal of its customs lawsuit, which occurred due to a calendaring mistake from the company's counsel. Judge M. Miler Baker reopened the case and reset the deadline to remove the case from the Customs Case Management Calendar to April 30, 2025 (van Gelder v. United States, CIT # 21-00160).
Canadian Lumber Exporter Says It Isn’t Barred from Bringing Case to CIT During Separate NAFTA Appeal
A Canadian exporter of softwood lumber said in a May 2 reply brief that its appeal to a NAFTA panel shouldn’t foreclose it from seeking entirely different relief at the Court of International Trade (Resolute FP Canada v. U.S., CIT # 23-00095).
The Commerce Department was wrong to deduct Section 301 duties from an exporter’s U.S. price as part of its antidumping duty calculation, that exporter said May 3 in defense of an earlier motion for judgment. It said Section 301 duties aren’t “normal import duties,” but rather remedial “special” duties that statute requires be included in export price calculations (Neimenggu Fufeng Biotechnologies Co. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00068).
The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade: