Legalization at the state level allows importer Keirton USA to “manufacture, possess, or distribute” marijuana but doesn't constitute a specific authorization to go against the "uniform Federal ban" on drug paraphernalia imports, DOJ said in a June 6 brief at the Court of International Trade (Keirton USA v. U.S. Customs and Border Protection, CIT #21-00452).
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Commerce Department erred by not hitting antidumping duty respondent Chandan Steel Limited with adverse facts available based on the company's inaccurate and incomplete reporting of information, the Coalition of American Flange Producers said in a June 3 complaint at the Court of International Trade. The coalition filed its case to challenge Commerce's final results in the administrative review of the AD order on stainless steel flanges from India. The AD petitioner also challenged Commerce's decision not to hit Kisaan Die Tech Private Limited with AFA based on its allegedly "inaccurate and incomplete reporting" (Coalition of American Flange Producers v. United States, CIT #22-00168).
Agricultural net wrap imported by RWW Klerks can only be used in harvesting machinery, and should be classified as a part of harvesting machinery of Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 8433, rather than as liquidated by CBP in heading 6005 as a textile material, the importer said in a June 3 motion filed at the Court of International Trade (RKW Klerks Inc. v. United States, CIT # 20-00001).
An importer seeks a refund of antidumping and countervailing duties for defective plywood that it says should have been valued at less than it was at liquidation, it said in a June 3 motion for summary judgment filed at the Court of International Trade. Bral asked the court to issue an order that the subject merchandise be reappraised to a value equal to 18% of its original value, order the assessment of ad valorum duties on the reappraised value of the merchandise, and order the refund of all excess duties plus interest (Bral Corporation v. United States, CIT # 20-00154).
Antidumping duty petitioner Nucor Corp.'s standards for quantitative data over a level of trade (LOT) adjustment misrepresent the Commerce Department's requirements for quantitative data, AD respondent Productos Laminados de Monterrey (Prolamsa) argued in a reply brief at the Court of International Trade. Nothing on the record suggests that Prolamsa's evidence was "incapable of being verified," the brief said (Productos Laminados de Monterrey S.A. de C.V. v. U.S., CIT #20-00166).
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its mandate June 2 in a case originally brought by exporter Nexteel over the second administrative review of the antidumping duty order on oil country tubular goods from South Korea. In the opinion, the appellate court said the Commerce Department didn't properly support its position that a particular market situation existed affecting inputs of the subject merchandise (see 2203110044). The Federal Circuit also sustained Commerce's practice of capping freight revenue when calculating U.S. price. Most recently in the case, respondent SeAH Steel unsuccessfully vied for a full court rehearing (Nexteel Co. Inc. v. United States, CAFC # 21-1334).
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Court of International Trade in a confidential June 1 opinion dismissed a challenge from Turkish steel exporter Borusan Mannesmann Boru Sanayi ve Ticaret seeking the reversal of its denied Section 232 steel and aluminum tariff exclusion requests. In a letter to the litigants, Judge Timothy Reif said that the parties have until June 8 to review the bracketed confidential information and the remainder of the opinion to see if anything else should be redacted from the public versions. The U.S. originally moved to toss the case since the subject entries are not liquidated, and Borusan filed the case under Section 1581(a), which requires a protestable decision to occur before such a claim can be made (see 2108260062). In a public judgment, Reif sided with the U.S., dismissing the case (Borusan Mannesmann Boru Sanayi ve Ticaret v. United States, CIT #21-00186).