The Court of International Trade in a Dec. 22 opinion granted plaintiff Aluminum Extrusions Fair Trade Committee's motion for a preliminary injunction in an Enforce and Protect Act case. Judge Richard Eaton ruled that the plaintiff sufficiently proved that it will be "immediately and irreparably" harmed without the injunction barring liquidation of importer Kingtom Aluminio's aluminum extrusions until the litigation has ended. The judge further ruled that the industry group has a "'fair chance' of success on the meritsm" given that there have been several cases with the same merchandise and parties where CBP has asked for voluntary remand or reversed itself.
Aspects Furniture International, plaintiff in an Enforce and Protect Act case, is waiving its arguments about CBP's lack of public summaries in an evasion proceeding, the plaintiff told the Court of International Trade in a Dec. 20 motion. Asking the court to partially waive its November order on the public summaries, Aspects said that, because CBP is reopening the record to allow revised public versions of certain documents to be submitted and requesting that the plaintiff resubmit most of the public version submissions made during the investigation, the court's order is no longer needed (Aspects Furniture International v. United States, CIT # 20-03824).
The Commerce Department must reconsider its scope ruling which placed importer Valeo North America's T-series aluminum sheet under the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on aluminum sheet from China, the Court of International Trade ruled in a Dec. 21 opinion. Judge Mark Barnett sent the ruling back to Commerce after finding that the agency did not properly support its inclusion of unregistered aluminum alloys to the scope with substantial evidence. While the judge did say that Commerce properly found that Valeo's sheet is a clad product, the agency must provide further explanation over the heat treatability of 3XXX-series alloys.
The Court of International Trade on Dec. 21 upheld the Commerce Department's pick of Brazil as the main surrogate country in an antidumping duty investigation on wood moldings and millwork from China. After clarifying the controlling question of the case is whether a "reasonable mind" could conclude that Commerce chose the best available information, Judge Gary Katzmann sustained the agency's pick of Brazil over Malaysia.
A World Trade Organization dispute settlement panel found the U.S. violated global trade rules by requiring goods made in Hong Kong to be marked as being made in China. Submitting its ruling Dec. 21, the three-arbitrator panel found the U.S. measures inconsistent with the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, saying the U.S. failed to show the moves were made in response to an "emergency in international relations." The U.S. argued the change in the origin requirement was needed to safeguard American national security.
Cannabis and cannabis accessory importers now have a "strong legal argument with potentially broad applications to challenge CBP's seizures" of marijuana paraphernalia in light of two recent Court of International Trade decisions, Harris Bricken lawyer Adams Lee said in a Dec. 16 blog post. Both cases involved the question of whether an importer could enter marijuana-related drug paraphernalia into Washington state, given that marijuana was made legal at the state level but remained illegal federally. Lee said that given how the opinions were structured, a state law repealing a past prohibition on such products "could be enough of an 'authorization' by the state law to block the federal prohibition on importing drug paraphernalia."
The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Court of International Trade in a confidential Dec. 20 opinion upheld the Commerce Department's remand results in a case on the 2017-18 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not assembled into modules, from China. In the remand results, Commerce dropped its use of partial adverse facts available over unreported factors of production data, reverting to neutral facts available, and changed how it values silver paste using Malaysian surrogate data (see 2207070047). However, the agency stuck by positions previously sent back by the trade court on how to value backsheets and ethyl vinyl acetate using surrogate data. In a letter to the litigants, Judge Claire Kelly said she wishes to issue a public version of the opinion on "or shortly after" Jan. 4 (Risen Energy Co. v. United States, CIT Consol. # 20-03743).
The Commerce Department illegally hit antidumping respondent Unicatch Industrial Co. with adverse facts available over the fact that the company did not submit a complete cost reconciliation, Unicatch and other appellants argued in a Dec. 19 opening brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Unicatch, along with TC International, Hor Liang Industrial Corp. and Romp Coil Nails Industries, argued that all the data needed to complete the cost reconciliation was on the record, meaning the respondent "could have easily completed the reconciliation in a manner required if it had realized that Commerce was not satisfied with its response" (Pro-Team Coil Nail Enterprise v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 22-2241).
The Commerce Department cannot set the all-others rate in an antidumping duty review by taking a simple average of a de minimis and an adverse facts available rate, the Court of International Trade ruled in a Dec. 21 opinion. Sending the case back to Commerce for the fifth time, Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves cited a key U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruling that made the same determination. The judge said that the court's rules "require the just and speedy determination of every action and proceeding," so the agency should refrain from "submitting the same unreasonable-as-applied, punitive all-others separate rate."