Italian pasta exporters La Molisana and Valdigrano di Flavio Pagani will appeal a Court of International Trade decision upholding the Commerce Department's 2018-19 review of the antidumping duty order on pasta from Italy. Per the notice of appeal, the exporters will take the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In the opinion, the trade court said Commerce permissibly refused to adjust its threshold for differentiating between types of pasta in its duty calculations (see 2304240035). La Molisana claimed Commerce's "breakpoint" of 12.5% protein content did not reflect the market reality, but Judge Richard Eaton held that the company's evidence was not applicable industrywide, making it "unreliable and insufficient" (La Molisana v. United States, CIT # 21-00291).
The Court of International Trade on June 20 upheld CBP's finding that importer Skyview Cabinet USA evaded the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on wooden cabinets and vanities from China. Judge Stephen Vaden said that, contrary to Skyview's claims, CBP adequately found that "contradictions, omissions, and inconsistencies" in the company's submissions were enough to find the data to not be credible and that the record backs the evasion findings against the firm.
The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its mandate on June 16 in a case on whether the Commerce Department has the statutory authority to conduct expedited countervailing duty reviews. The appellate court said the agency does have the authority under the Uruguay Round Agreement Act's enactment of certain provisions that favor individual company determinations and the URAA's grant of regulatory-implementation power to Commerce (see 2304250061) (Committee Overseeing Action for Lumber International Trade Investigations or Negotiations v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 22-1021).
The Tariff Act's customs penalty statute, and not the False Claims Act, governs customs penalties for fraud, gross negligence and negligence, and is the exclusive means to recover liquidated antidumping duties, appellant Sigma told the U.S. Court of Appealsfor the 9th Circuit in a June 12 brief. Responding to the court's order for supplemental briefing on the two laws, Sigma said 19 U.S.C. 1592 is more specific than the False Claims Act and has a "detailed and comprehensive legal regime," including specific provisions addressing customs fraud (Island Industries v. Sigma, 9th Cir. # 22-55063).
The Commerce Department said that hardwood plywood exported to the U.S. by the Vietnam Finewood Company made using two-ply panels imported into Vietnam from China are outside the scope of antidumping and countervailing duties on hardwood plywood from China, in remand results submitted to the Court of International Trade on June 15. The agency said under protest that the goods are not subject to the duties since the trade court ruled that the scope language "unambiguously" shows that the orders do not include Chinese two-ply panels (Vietnam Finewood Company v. United States, CIT # 22-00049).
Judge Stephen Vaden at the Court of International Trade said that parties in his cases that use text drafted from a generative artificial intelligence program, such as ChatGPT and Google Bard, must disclose the programs used and the parts of the text drafted by AI. Parties also must submit a certification saying that the use of the AI program "has not resulted in the disclosure of any confidential or business proprietary information to any unauthorized party."
South Korean company Anyclo International pleaded guilty to evading customs duties on clothing it imported, agreeing to a civil settlement with the U.S. under which it will pay $2.05 million to the U.S. in restitution, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of New Jersey announced. A $250,000 criminal fine also was levied. Anyclo will pay the settlement, plus interest, over 15 months to resolve potential charges under the False Claims Act.
The Commerce Department assigned exporter Double Coin Holdings the 105.31% China-wide dumping rate in its June 15 remand results filed in a suit on an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on off-the-road tires from China. The trade court previously remanded the case so that Commerce could hit the company with the China-wide rate after finding that Double Coin failed to rebut the presumption of government control (China Manufacturing Alliance v. United States, CIT # 15-00124).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit dismissed an appeal from Printing Textiles, doing business as Berger Textiles, for failing to file an opening brief. The company filed its suit to contest CBP's inaction on its requests to void two denied protests on Berger's Canvas Banner Matisse coated fabric imports, which were hit with antidumping duties on artist canvas from China. Berger claimed that the imports were not subject to the order and CBP should not have liquidated the entries since the Commerce Department had opened a scope inquiry on the imports. After the Court of International Trade tossed the suit for lack of jurisdiction under Section 1581(i), the court's "residual" jurisdiction, the Federal Circuit in March rejected Berger's bid for a temporary injunction, which would have required CBP to return the goods to unliquidated status or suspend the firm's protests (see 2303160023) (Printing Textiles, dba Berger Textiles v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1576).