Washington-based importer Keirton USA isn't permitted to import drug paraphernalia since Washington state law doesn't expressly authorize the possession of such items, the U.S. told the Court of International Trade in a March 28 cross-motion for judgment. If the state's current laws did authorize possession of drug paraphernalia, then the mere absence of criminal liability -- the situation in Washington -- would consume the whole statute federally outlawing possession of drug paraphernalia, DOJ said (Keirton USA, Inc. v. United States, CIT #21-00452).
The Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund is an illegal tax on exports and may not be enforced by the U.S., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit said in a March 24 opinion. Affirming oil exporter Trafigura Trading's win in a Texas district court, Judges Jacques Wiener and James Ho ruled that the fund constitutes a tax, rather than a user fee, and violates the constitutional ban on export taxes. Judge James Graves dissented, writing that because there was a legitimate dispute on whether the fund is a user fee, the district court's order should be vacated (Trafigura Trading v. U.S., 5th Cir. #21-20127).
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Commerce Department unlawfully decided not to initiate a changed circumstances review following GreenFirst Forest Productions' acquisition of Rayonier A.M. Canada's lumber mills, GreenFirst said in a March 25 complaint at the Court of International Trade. GreenFirst said that Commerce misapplied agency practice in denying the CCR since RYAM's rate was not based on any subsidies it received. The agency also violated Congress' directive to investigate changed circumstances sufficient to warrant a review when it declined to embark on the CCR (GreenFirst Forest Products Inc. v. United States, CIT #22-00097).
The Commerce Department requested a voluntary remand in a March 28 filing at the Court of International Trade so it can reconsider its use of adverse facts available relating to China's Export Buyer's Credit Program. The remand is appropriate given Commerce's "evolving practice" on the topic, the brief said. In a separate countervailing duty investigation, Commerce found that it was able to verify that a respondent's U.S. customers did not use the program without certain information requested from the Chinese government (Risen Energy Co. v. United States, CIT Consol. #20-03912).
The Court of International Trade in a March 28 decision denied mattress importer Ashley Furniture Industries and its foreign manufacturers a request for an open-ended injunction in an antidumping duty case. Judge Timothy Reif said that the plaintiffs failed to show that the threat of liquidation posed immediate irreparable harm and that they clearly had a likelihood to succeed on the merits of the case. The decision cuts against two other CIT decisions granting an open-ended injunction.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
A host of complaints by Victoria's Secret and One Step Up at the Court of International Trade have been reassigned from Judge Thomas Aquilino to Judge Timothy Stanceu. The complaints concern the proper classification of women's garments over a series of entries between 2002 and 2008 (see 2203140036) and ask CIT to direct CBP to reliquidate the entries and refund the excess duties collected, with interest.
The Court of International Trade denied pig farrowing crate importer Ikadan System USA's motion for an extension of time to file its monition for judgment but stayed the case until the court sorts through the importer's motion to supplement the record. Ikadan requested the extension since it found out that certain items weren't in the administrative record. Instead of extending the briefing schedule as the plaintiff requested, Judge Leo Gordon stayed the briefing in the case until the matter is sorted out. In response, the U.S. filed a motion stating its lack of opposition to Ikadan's bid to supplement the record despite not conferring with the Justice Department. Ikadan then filed a confidential brief giving the court the missing information (Ikadan System USA v. U.S., CIT #21-00592).
The Commerce Department's decision to find that the South Korean government provided electricity below cost for certain tariff classes but still say that electricity provision conferred a non-measurable benefit is illegal, U.S. steel company Nucor Corporation said in a March 25 complaint at the Court of International Trade (Nucor Corporation v. United States, CIT #22-00070).