DOJ's administrative proceedings against SpaceX looking into whether the space exploration firm's hiring practices violated federal export control laws are unconstitutional, SpaceX said in a Sept. 15 complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas (Space Exploration Technologies v. Carol Bell, S.D. Tex. # 23-00137).
The Court of International Trade on Sept. 21 ruled in a customs classification case involving eight different categories of decorative plant parts, siding with importer Second Nature Designs on its preferred classification of two of the categories and with the government on one of the categories. Pertaining to three other categories, Judge Gary Katzmann said that there were fact questions remaining, leading the judge to deny summary judgment and advance litigation to its "second phase."
Ukraine filed dispute cases at the World Trade Organization against Hungary, Poland and Slovakia concerning their bans on Ukraine's agricultural exports, the country's Ministry of Economy announced, according to an unofficial translation. The ministry said the three nations' "unilateral ban" violates the countries' international obligations.
The Judicial Council of the Federal Circuit in a Sept. 20 order affirmed a three-judge panel's suggestion that Judge Pauline Newman shouldn't be assigned new cases for one year due to her efforts to impede the probe into her fitness to continue serving on the bench. The council said the evidence "amply justified" an order subjecting Newman to a medical examination and that her refusal to comply, among other things, thwarted the council's ability to decide whether she "has a disability that renders her unable to perform the duties of her important office."
The U.S. and Lincoln General Insurance Co. both moved to dismiss 11 different customs penalty claims concerning various single transaction bonds the company entered into with importer Aftahour. The consent motion to dismiss the lawsuits said that "the parties reached an understanding regarding priority classification that enabled [CBP] to request that the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania approve the United States' claim" as "undisputed and resolved." As a result, the U.S. "distributed the assets of Lincoln."
The scope of the U.S. government's remand request in an Enforce and Protect Act case in light of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's ruling in Royal Brush Manufacturing v. U.S. is "not appropriate," plaintiffs led by Newtrend USA Co. said in a Sept. 18 reply brief. The government didn't say whether on remand it will put on the record "the exculpatory documents that Plaintiffs" gave to CBP during verification that the agency "refused to allow in the original proceeding," nor did it say whether it would allow additional briefing on those materials, the brief said (Newtrend USA Co. v. United States, CIT # 22-00347).
The Commerce Department shifted to entirely relying on adverse facts available rates for antidumping duty respondent Saffron Living Co. on remand in a case on the AD investigation on mattresses from Thailand. The result is a 763.28% margin for Saffron and a 572.66% mark for all-other exporters, up considerably from 37.48% prior to the remand (Brooklyn Bedding v. United States, CIT # 21-00285).
The Court of International Trade on Sept. 20 upheld the Commerce Department's decision on remand to include importer SMA Surface's Twilight product within the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on quartz surface products from China. Judge Gary Katzmann said that SMA Surfaces waived its challenge to the remand, which said the product doesn't qualify for the crushed glass surface product exclusion, by failing to present developed arguments in response to the remand decision.
China will appeal a World Trade Organization panel ruling rejecting its claim that the retaliatory tariffs placed on the U.S. in response to Section 232 duties were justified, the country's Ministry of Commerce said Sept. 19, according to an unofficial translation. Beijing will appeal "into the void" seeing as the Appellate Body currently doesn't function, barring future enforcement action against China in the dispute.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade: