Plaintiffs on Dec. 20 dismissed three related cases challenging the Commerce Department's anti-circumvention findings regarding the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on solar cells from China. No reason for the dismissals was given. The suits were brought by exporters Red Sun Energy Long An Company, Trina Solar (Vietnam) Science & Technology Co., Trina Solar Energy Development Co., Trina Solar Co. and Trina Solar Science & Technology (Thailand).
A Turkish aluminum foil exporter Dec. 22 sought expedited consideration of a request for a voluntary remand by the Commerce Department and challenged concerns raised by domestic petitioners in a case involving a duty drawback adjustment on its products (Assan Aluminyum Sanayi ve Ticaret v. U.S., CIT # 21-00616).
No lawsuits have been filed recently at the Court of International Trade.
Countervailing duty petitioner Nucor Corp. and the U.S. on Dec. 28 dismissed their appeal of a Court of International Trade ruling sustaining the Commerce Department's decision that found electricity wasn't provided below cost in South Korea. No reason was given for why the appellants dismissed the appeal, and counsel didn't respond to our request for comment (POSCO v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 22-1576, -2130).
Importer Dell Will Customs Brokers (USA) Inc. dismissed its customs case on Dec. 27 at the Court of International Trade. The company filed suit in December 2021 claiming that its scaffolding, parts or accessories, of Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheadings 7308.40.00 and 9403.20.00, are exempt from Section 301 China tariffs under secondary subheading 9903.88.03. Counsel for Dell Will didn't respond to our request for comment (Dell Will Customs Brokers (USA) Inc. F/A Metal Tech-Omega Inc. v. U.S., CIT # 21-00630).
Nebraska resident Byungmin Chae submitted a petition for rehearing en banc to the U.S. Supreme Court in a renewed attempt to get the high court to hear his appeal of the 2018 customs broker license exam. Chae, mostly representing himself, has seen his case through multiple rounds of appeal at CBP, the Court of International Trade and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, ending up one correctly answered question shy of a passing grade (Byungmin Chae v. Janet Yellen, U.S. Sup. Ct. # 23-200). The court received the Nov. 17 petition on Dec. 18.
Commerce has still not properly explained why India is a better surrogate country for Vietnam than Indonesia for an antidumping duty review’s analysis of fish filet exports, an importer said in remand comments Dec. 22 (Catfish Farmers of America v. U.S., CIT # 21-00380).
The Commerce Department unreasonably selected data from Kazakhstan's Bureau of Natural Statistics data to use as a tier two benchmark regarding the provision of natural gas for less than adequate remuneration, countervailing duty petitioner The Mosaic Co. argued in a Dec. 28 complaint (The Mosaic Co. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00247).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit allowed exporter Tau-Ken Temir (TKT) to use 3,135 additional words in its reply brief in a case on the countervailing duty investigation on silicon metal from Kazakstan. TKT asked for 14,000 words, twice the original allowance of 7,000, but the appellate court granted it the use of 10,135 words amid opposition from CVD petitioners (Tau-Ken Temir v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 22-2204).
The U.S. and surety company Aegis Security Insurance Co. both wrote to the Court of International Trade following an oral argument to give notice of their intent to redact information from the proceeding's transcript. The government said it intends to redact the identity of the surety firm for the single transaction bonds at issue in the customs penalty suit, while Aegis said it is looking to redact the amount of the bonds issued by Hartford Insurance Co., the amount of CBP's demand on Hartford and the amount of CBP's demand on Aegis (United States v. Aegis Security Insurance Co., CIT # 20-03628).