Counsel for importer Magid Glove & Safety Manufacturing Co. was allowed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to appear remotely for the company's oral argument in its customs suit on plastic-dipped knit gloves. Magid Gloves brought its case to the appellate court after the Court of International Trade said the gloves belong under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 6116 instead of under heading 3926 (see 2203280037). In its arguments, the importer said the case rests on the definition of "completely embedded," claiming that "if the knit fabric making up the shell of the glove is completely embedded in plastic, the gloves" would not fit under Section XI and, thus, from heading 6116 (Magid Glove & Safety Manufacturing Co. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 22-1793).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its mandate Sept. 1 in a case on the Commerce Department's use of adverse facts available against countervailing duty respondent Jangho Group. In a ruling on the 2013 review of the CVD order on aluminum extrusions, the appellate court upheld the Court of International Trade in its ruling that Commerce properly found the Chinese government and Jangho Group failed to respond to the best of their ability on whether aluminum extrusions producers are "authorities" (see 2205100076) (Taizhou United Imp. & Exp. Co. v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 22-2000).
A case concerning the Commerce Department's refusal to start a successor-in-interest changed circumstances review for exporter GreenFirst Forest Products under the countervailing duty investigation on softwood lumber products from Canada has been dismissed with the agreement of all parties (GreenFirst Forest Products v. U.S., CIT # 22-00097).
The U.S. asked the Court of International Trade for a voluntary remand in a countervailing duty case to reconsider the calculation of benchmark prices for land and ocean freight. The government said its practice regarding the calculation of these figures has evolved since the present case was brought by Risen Energy Co. and JA Solar on the 2019 review of the CVD order on solar cells from China (Risen Energy Co. v. United States, CIT Consol. # 22-00231).
The Commerce Department erred when it found that wood boards used to produce downstream cabinet products were wood “moulding and millwork” products, importer Hardware Resources said in an Aug. 31 complaint to the Court of International Trade. The suit contests Commerce's Aug. 2 final scope ruling which found that imported edge-glued boards were within the scope of antidumping and countervailing duty orders on wood mouldings and millwork products from China (see 2308080002) (Hardware Resources v. U.S., CIT # 23-00150).
An assessment of domestic interested party willingness to participate in five-year reviews of antidumping duty orders on stilbenic optical brightening agents from China and Taiwan doesn't itself constitute a "review," the International Trade Commission said in a Sept. 1 motion at the Court of International Trade. The ITC asked the court to affirm the termination of the five-year review of the AD orders at issue (Archroma U.S., Inc. v. U.S., CIT # 22-00354).
Two claims of substitution drawback for imports of petroleum derivatives already had been deemed liquidated when CBP later "attempted" liquidation,importer Performance Additives, LLC said in an Aug. 31 motion for judgment at the Court of International Trade. Performance Additives is seeking repayment of over $1.4 million in Section 301 duties it argues were improperly levied (Performance Additives v. U.S., CIT # 22-00044).
The Commerce Department released the results of its fourth remand redetermination in an antidumping duty investigation on steel nails from Taiwan, sticking with its use of a simple average to calculate the denominator of the Cohen’s d test coefficient. The department said it complied with the remand order by providing reasonable justification for its methodology in its test to identify "masked dumping" (Mid Continent Steel & Wire v. U.S., CIT # 15-00213).
A complaint by Turkish exporter Eregli Demir ve Celik Fabrikalari (Erdemir) that challenged the International Trade Commission's decision not to institute a changed circumstances review of the antidumping duty order on hot-rolled steel flat products from Turkey should be dismissed because Erdemir's claim was rendered moot when the ITC conducted a full sunset review, the ITC said in an Aug. 31 brief at the Court of International Trade (Ereğli Demir ve Çelik Fabrikalari v. U.S. International Trade Commission, CIT # 22-00350).
The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade: