The entire U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit should hear a case over whether tapered roller bearing importer Wanxiang America Corp. has jurisdiction to challenge guidance issued from the Commerce Department to CBP on the assessment of antidumping duties, the importer argued in an Oct. 18 petition at the Federal Circuit. Arguing that a panel at the appellate court's decision will force importers subject to customs penalty claims into a "Hobbesian choice," that will "eviscerate their right to judicial review," the entire court should reverse the panel's ruling, WAC argued (Wanxiang America Corporation v. United States, Fed. Cir. #20-1044).

The Commerce Department dropped its reliance on facts otherwise available in a countervailing duty review related to a South Korean port usage rights program, in Oct. 20 remand results submitted to the Court of International Trade. Having filed for a voluntary remand at CIT to tackle what it identified as its own mistakes in relying on facts otherwise available, Commerce found it no longer needed to apply facts available after receiving additional information from the relvant exporter (Hyundai Steel Company v. United States, CIT #20-03799).

Trade Law Daily is providing readers with some recent top stories. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.

The Commerce Department denied two Section 232 steel and aluminum tariff exclusion requests after completing a voluntary remand to reconsider its decision to initially reject the exclusion bids. Submitting the denials on Oct. 18 in remand results at the Court of International Trade, Commerce cited the International Trade Administration's analysis of the situation, which found that the domestic industry had enough capacity to take over for the subject imports (Maple Leaf Marketing, Inc. v. U.S., CIT #20-00125).

The Court of International remanded in part and sustained in part the final results of the 2017-18 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on oil country tubular goods from South Korea, in an Oct. 19 order. Tackling six different issues raised by the plaintiff, AD respondent SeAH Steel Corp., Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves sustained Commerce's constructed export price profit rate and its exclusion of freight revenue profit, while remanding Commerce's use of the Cohen's d test in its differential pricing analysis when identifying masked dumping and the agency's particular market situation determination.

The Court of International Trade should grant the Commerce Department's voluntary request for a remand in an antidumping case, so the agency can review whether it was appropriate to rely on supplemental questionnaire responses, seeing as it couldn't conduct an on-site verification, Commerce argued in an Oct. 18 brief (Ellwood City Forge Company, et al. v. United States, CIT #21-00007).

RANCHO MIRAGE, California -- Lawyers are seeing a rise in cases filed against customs brokers for failing to meet their fiduciary duties, said Cameron Roberts, a Roberts & Kehagiaras trade attorney. Many of the cases involve importers who allege their brokers didn’t correctly advise them about issues related to forced labor, Section 301 tariffs and certain agriculture imports, he said. “All of these issues are being put at the foot of the broker,” Roberts said, speaking during the Oct. 15 Western Cargo Conference.

The Court of International Trade granted the Department of Justice's motion to stay a case challenging the expansion of Section 232 duties on steel and aluminum “derivatives,” in an Oct. 14 order, due in part to the defendant's likelihood of succeeding on appeal. Finding that a recent U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit opinion indicates DOJ's chances of success at the appellate court, CIT also stayed any resulting liquidation but noted that the fact pattern in the present case reads differently from that of the recent Federal Circuit case.

The Commerce Department found that a countervailing duty investigation respondent's U.S. customers did not use China's Export Buyer's Credit Program in the investigation's final determination despite the Chinese government's continued failure to provide information, indicating a potential shift in how the agency will approach how it verifies non-use of the program.

The International Trade Commission granted four Curtis Mallet-Prevost lawyers access to a safeguard proceeding on behalf of LG Electronics, potentially ending a dispute at the Court of International Trade over denied access (see 2110130037) (LG Electronics USA, Inc., et al. v. United States, CIT 21-00520). The ITC's one-page letter does not address larger issues in the case, such as the commission's power to deny access at all