Aluminum printing plate producer Eastman Kodak agreed with the International Trade Commission that exporter Fujifilm’s U.S.-produced products had been injured by Fujifilm's imports (see 2510240049) (Fujifilm North America Corp. v. United States, CIT # 24-00251).

The Commerce Department erred in finding that importer IPG Photonics' heat sink models don't fit under the explicit exclusion under the antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders on aluminum extrusions from China for "finished heat sinks," IPG argued in an Oct. 24 complaint at the Court of International Trade (IPG Photonics v. United States, CIT # 25-00212).

The following lawsuit has been filed recently at the Court of International Trade:

An exporter that has domestic production facilities can be injured by its own imports, the International Trade Commission argued in an Oct. 20 response brief to aluminum plate manufacturer Fujifilm Corp. (Fujifilm North America Corp. v. United States, CIT # 24-00251).

Three conservation advocacy groups, the Center for Biological Diversity, the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Animal Welfare Institute, moved to intervene in a case from a group of seafood product companies against the National Marine Fisheries Service's comparability findings of 240 fisheries across 46 nations, which will lead to an import ban from the fisheries. The advocacy groups also moved the Court of International Trade for an expedited consideration of their intervention motion so that they can take part in the court's expedited consideration of the seafood companies' motion for a preliminary injunction against the comparability findings (National Fisheries Institute v. United States, CIT # 25-00223).

Two more legal scholars on Oct. 22 added their amici curiae brief to a stack before the Supreme Court for its upcoming ruling on Learning Resources and V.O.S. Selections. They focused on the danger an unlimited executive tariff authority would pose to the separation of powers (Donald J. Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, U.S. 25-250) (Learning Resources v. Donald J. Trump, U.S. 24-1287).

Mexican steel wire exporter Deacero argued again Oct. 20 that the Commerce Department shouldn't treat circumvention inquiries involving third-country processing the same as those involving U.S. processing (Deacero v. United States, CIT # 24-00212).

The Court of International Trade on Oct. 20 denied importer Detroit Axle's motion to lift the stay of its case contesting President Donald Trump's decision to end the de minimis threshold for goods from China. In a text-only order, the trade court said the company's motion for partial summary judgment is stayed pending resolution of V.O.S. Selections v. Donald J. Trump, the lead case on whether Trump can use the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose tariffs, which is currently being briefed before the Supreme Court (Axle of Dearborn d/b/a Detroit Axle v. United States, CIT # 25-00091).

The Supreme Court on Oct. 23 expanded the time for oral argument in the lead cases on the legality of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, giving each side 40 minutes to make their cases. However, the court said the parties challenging the tariffs, which are two groups of importers and one group of 12 U.S. states, shall split their time evenly between the private parties and the U.S. states (Donald J. Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, U.S. 25-250) (Learning Resources v. Donald J. Trump, U.S. 24-1287).

Antidumping duty petitioner Domtar dropped its case at the Court of International Trade on the 2022-23 administrative review of the AD order on thermal paper from Germany. Domtar filed a notice of dismissal on Oct. 21, which the court granted the same day. Counsel for Domtar didn't immediately respond to a request for comment (Domtar v. United States, CIT # 25-00213).