The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its mandate on Jan. 7 after rejecting Canadian lumber exporter J.D. Irving's attempt to challenge the denial of an antidumping duty cash deposit rate under Section 1581(i). The company recently petitioned the Supreme Court to hear the case (see 2501020026). CAFC dismissed the case after finding its true nature to be a challenge to a former AD rate received by J.D. Irving, making jurisdiction proper under Section 1581(c) (see 2410100042). In addition, the court said relief could be sought either before a binational panel or in an AD review (J.D. Irving v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1652).
Akin Gump elevated three of its international trade attorneys to partners, the firm announced. The attorneys are Katherine Padgett, who works in the international trade and outbound and inbound investment practices; George Pence, who focuses on national security and white collar criminal defense and investigations; and Devin Sikes, who focuses on trade remedies to assist clients.
China opened a safeguard investigation on the meat of bovine animals, the World Trade Organization announced. China told the WTO's Committee on Safeguards that it opened the investigation on Dec. 27 and that interested parties have 20 days from Dec. 27 to say if they wish to take part in the proceeding.
CBP will liquidate importer Neo Chemicals & Oxides' mixed oxide products using a "first sale" transaction valuation method, the government and importer said in a stipulated judgment. Submitting the stipulation to the Court of International Trade on Jan. 6, the parties said the company's entries "will be appraised under the transaction value method based on the prices the middleman paid to the manufacturer." Neo brought the suit in 2021 seeking first sale valuation of its goods classifiable under Harmonized Tariff Schedule headings 3815 and 2846 (see 2108190065) (Neo Chemicals & Oxides v. United States, CIT # 21-00453).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit reversed a lower court's dismissal of sugar producer North American Surgar Industries' suit against five companies for allegedly trafficking the company's property, which was stolen by the Cuban government. Judges Charles Wilson, Robert Luck and Barbara Lagoa held that the lower court incorrectly found that the alleged violations of the Helms-Burton Act only occurred in Cuba (North American Sugar Industries v. Xinjiang Goldwind Science & Technology, 11th Cir. # 23-10126).
James Ransdell, an international trade attorney at Cassidy Levy, has been elevated to partner, the firm announced. Ransdell joined Cassidy Levy in 2018 as an associate and works on trade remedies and customs issues.
The Court of International Trade will be closed Jan. 9 in observance of the national day of mourning for the late President Jimmy Carter, the court announced. The day will be considered a "legal holiday" for the purposes of computing time and motions to enlarge time under the court's Rule 6.
The International Trade Commission on Jan. 3 amended its rules of practice and procedure to make various technical corrections, clarify certain provisions, harmonize parts of the ITC's rules and "address concerns that have arisen in Commission practice." The amendments include "replacing gender-specific language with gender-neutral language in the rules," eliminating paper copies and to permanently abide by e-filing requirements, and clarifying the sufficiency of a complaint alleging a violation of Section 337.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The International Trade Commission erred when it found that aluminum extrusion exports from 14 nations didn't injure the U.S. industry, AD/CVD petitioners the U.S. Aluminum Extruders Coalition and the United Steelworkers argued in a Jan. 3 complaint at the Court of International Trade. The seven-count complaint challenged, among other things, the commission's conclusions that the extrusions didn't undersell the domestic like product nor have "significant adverse price effects" (U.S. Aluminum Extruders Coalition v. United States, CIT # 25-00001)