The following lawsuits were filed recently at the Court of International Trade:

The U.S. on Jan. 12 opposed a group of importers' bid to add two claims to their case challenging CBP's initiation of an Enforce and Protect Act duty evasion investigation as "untimely" and the interim measures imposed as a violation of the importers' due process rights (Centric Pipe v. United States, CIT Consol. # 25-00182).

In a Jan. 12 reply brief supporting a motion for judgment, importer AM Stone again argued it provided enough information to the Commerce Department for it to make certain calculations in its antidumping duty and countervailing duty reviews of quartz surface products from Malaysia without resorting to facts otherwise available (AM Stone & Cabinets v. United States, CIT # 24-00241).

The Commerce Department properly picked Turkey as a third country comparison market and decided that no adjustment to an antidumping duty respondent's cost of manufacturing was necessary in the AD investigation on melamine from Qatar, the U.S. argued in a Jan. 9 response to petitioner Cornerstone Chemical's motion for judgment at the Court of International Trade (Cornerstone Chemical v. United States, CIT # 25-00005).

The following lawsuits were filed recently at the Court of International Trade:

In a Jan. 8 notice of supplemental authority, the government said that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decision in Mosaic Co. v. United States (see 2512050026) was applicable to a current case challenging the Commerce Department's finding that a Korean electricity program was de facto specific to one of its three largest users (Hyundai Steel v. United States, CIT Consol. # 24-00190).

After their previous Dec. 12 reply briefs were struck, petitioners American Shrimp Processors Associations and Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Committee jointly opposed the motions for judgment filed by shrimp exporters from Ecuador, India and Vietnam challenging an International Trade Commission injury finding (Industrial Pesquera Santa Priscila v. United States, CIT # 25-00029; Seafood Exporters Association of India v. United States, CIT # 25-00031; Shrimp Committee of the Vietnam Association of Seafood Exporters and Producers v. United States, CIT # 25-00032).

Law firm Miller & Chevalier asked the Court of International Trade to partially lift the stay ordered in a handful of cases seeking refunds of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to let certain importers file a motion for a preliminary injunction to suspend liquidation of certain entries for which the importers have paid IEEPA tariffs.

Importer G&H Diversified Manufacturing opposed Jan. 8 the United States’ request for an extension of time in its steel tube classification case, saying it hadn’t been consulted and would be prejudiced by the delay (G&H Diversified Manufacturing v. United States, CIT # 22-00130).

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Jan. 9 denied Nebraska man Byungmin Chae's petition for rehearing en banc in Chae's second case on the results of his April 2018 customs broker license examination after the court dismissed the case on the basis that Chae should have raised his claims in his first case on the test.