The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Sept. 15-21:

Two Chinese nationals were recently sentenced to lengthy prison sentences for importing fentanyl precursor chemicals and money laundering through Wuhan-based chemical manufacturer Amarvel Biotech, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York announced last week. Qingzhou Wang, who operated as Amarvel's principal executive, was sentenced Sept. 18 to 25 years in prison, while Yiyi Chen, the company's marketing manager, was sentenced last month to 15 years.

The Supreme Court set oral argument for the lead cases on the legality of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act for Nov. 5 (Donald J. Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, U.S. 25-250) (Learning Resources v. Donald J. Trump, U.S. 24-1287).

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Sept. 8-14:

Importers who have paid tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act should look to affirmatively safeguard their right to receive refunds should the Supreme Court vacate in some form President Donald Trump's tariffs imposed under the statute, various law firms said. The attorneys issued the alerts in the wake of the Supreme Court's decision to hear two cases on the legality of IEEPA tariffs on an expedited basis (see 2509090058).

Nike reached a settlement with importer City Ocean International and freight forwarder City Ocean Logistics in Nike's case against the companies for trademark counterfeiting, trademark infringement, false designation of origin, trademark dilution, importation of goods bearing infringing marks and violation of the Tariff Act. The terms of the settlement weren't disclosed, though Nike dismissed its complaint with prejudice, meaning it can't be refiled (Nike v. Eastern Ports Custom Brokers, D.N.J. # 2:11-04390).

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the weeks of Aug. 11-17, Aug. 18-24, Aug. 25-31 and Sept. 1-7:

The Court of International Trade on Sept. 8 dismissed exporter Pipe & Piling Supplies' case against the 2022-23 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on large diameter welded pipe from Canada, for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Judge Jane Restani said the company failed to notify the other interested parties of its lawsuit as required by the USMCA, as required by 19 U.S.C. 1516a(g)(3)(B), adding that this requirement is a jurisdictional one.

Plaintiffs in the primary case on the legality of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act told the Supreme Court on Sept. 5 that they consent to the high court's review of the case. Responding to the government's petition for writ of certiorari filed after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled against many of the tariffs, the plaintiffs, consisting of five importers, said Supreme Court review is "essential," and the court's "final word is needed urgently" in light of the harm wrought by the tariffs (Donald J. Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, U.S. 25-250).

Surety company U.S. Specialty Insurance Company argued in an Aug. 29 complaint at the Court of International Trade that CBP failed to use transaction value to value importer Cheer Rise's garment entries. Instead, the agency arbitrarily decided to use the "fall back method" of appraisal, "rendering the appraisement unlawful," the complaint said (U.S. Specialty Insurance Co. v. United States, CIT # 25-00188).