The Commerce Department's analysis of whether a company from a non-market economy has rebutted the presumption of government control was improperly applied to exporters that are minority-owned by state-owned enterprises, exporters Aeolus Tyre Co. and Guizhou Tyre Co. said in a pair of opening briefs at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Both companies said Commerce instead should have considered all four factors relating to the presumption of foreign state control and not just the "truncated analysis" of whether potential control over export activities via control of management selection was in play (Guizhou Tyre Co. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-2163).

The U.S. Supreme Court on Oct. 30 denied a petition for writ of certiorari regarding one question on Nebraska man Byungmin Chae's customs broker license exam. Chae took the test in April 2018 and subsequently took the result through multiple levels of administrative and judicial appeal before seeking Supreme Court review. He will remain one correct answer shy of the 75% threshold needed to pass the exam (Byungmin Chae v. Janet Yellen, U.S. Sup. Ct. # 23-200).

Importer Cherish Your Health Food "failed to exercise reasonable care and competence" in submitting import documents related to its entries of fresh garlic from China, the U.S. said in an Oct. 30 complaint at the Court of International Trade. As a result of the company's "negligent violations" of customs laws, the U.S. is seeking over $254,000 related to a group of three entries, dubbed "Group A," it said (United States v. Cherish Your Health Food, CIT # 23-00230).

The U.S. Supreme Court denied importer PrimeSource Building Products' petition for writ of certiorari in a case on President Donald Trump's expansion of Section 232 duties onto steel and aluminum "derivative" products. PrimeSource argued that the president's decision to extend the duties onto these goods was unlawful since it was made beyond procedural time limits laid out in the statute (PrimeSource Building Products v. U.S., U.S. Sup. Ct. # 23-69).

CBP failed to apply an Office of the U.S. Trade Representative-granted Section 301 exclusion for "flexible pressure sensitive LCD display devices used as a surface for electronic wiring" to importer Kent Displays' merchandise, the importer told the Court of International Trade in an Oct. 27 motion for summary judgment. Kent argued that its Model WT16312 Dashboard is the type of device as described by the exclusion and, as such, should be free of the 25% Section 301 duties under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 9013.80.7000 (Kent Displays v. United States, CIT # 20-00156).

A CBP headquarters decision on a protest is a “prior interpretive ruling or decision" that Ohio-based tent importer Under the Weather should have been able to rely on for tariff classification purposes, and as a result its classification challenge on backpacking tents shouldn't be dismissed, the importer told the Court of International Trade in a Oct. 26 brief at the Court of International Trade (Under the Weather v. U.S., CIT # 21-00211).

The Commerce Department, on remand at the Court of International Trade, switched to using Brazilian surrogate value information to value antidumping duty respondent Jiangsu Senmao Bamboo and Wood Industry Co.'s non-oak log inputs. Changing course as part of the 2019-20 AD review of multilayered wood flooring from China, Commerce switched to using Brazilian data, the primary surrogate nation, after the trade court rejected its initial use of Malaysian data for the factors of production (Jiangsu Senmao Bamboo and Wood Industry Co. v. U.S., CIT # 22-00190).

The Court of International Trade in an Oct. 24 order granted the U.S. motion to enter an amended protective order in Chinese printer cartridge maker Ninestar Corp.'s case against its placement on the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act Entity List. The order dismissed Ninestar's motion to compel the unredacted administrative record as moot, while clarifying that the order was issued "without prejudice to the parties' rights to petition the court to further modify the terms of the APO" or their right to challenge the designation of materials as confidential under the APO (Ninestar Corp. v. United States, CIT # 23-00182).

The Commerce Department failed to link its finding of the Chinese government's control over exporter Pirelli Tyre Co.'s management to the company's export activities, Pirelli told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in its Oct. 24 opening brief. The agency "adopted an unlawful interpretation and application of the rebuttable presumption" of government control as part of the 2017-18 antidumping duty review of passenger vehicle and light truck tires from China, the brief said (Pirelli Tyre Co. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-2266).

The Commerce Department flipped its position on remand to find that exporter Yama Ribbons and Bows Co. didn't use China's Export Buyer's Credit Program, though it did continue to find that the exporter benefited from the provision of caustic soda and synthetic yarn for less than adequate remuneration (Yama Ribbons and Bows Co. v. United States, CIT # 21-00402).