The Court of International Trade on Jan. 21 ruled that Midwest Fastener's strike pin anchors are not nails, and are not subject to antidumping duties on steel nails from China. After a series of decisions wherein CIT told Commerce to reconsider its scope ruling that the strike pin anchors are subject to AD duties, the trade court ruled that an Aug. 28 U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decision in a related case answers the question of scope coverage definitively, holding masonry anchors from OMG aren't nails and can't be covered by an identical AD duty order on steel nails from Vietnam (see 2008280039). In light of that definitive decision, CIT departed from its earlier decisions that held the scope's coverage of masonry anchors ambiguous, and directed Commerce to perform a more thorough analysis. “Commerce should now make its determination in accordance with the Court of Appeals’” holding, CIT said, giving the agency 60 days to submit its remand redetermination.

A Texas federal court on Jan. 21 dismissed a $6 million legal malpractice suit brought against two trade lawyers at Steptoe & Johnson, holding it lacked jurisdiction over the case. Thomas Trendl and Gregory McCue had been accused by Allied Fitting of failing to advise it to file protests to maintain its eligibility for refunds on its steel imports (see 2010140049), but Southern Texas U.S. District Court Judge Kenneth Hoyt ruled that the suit covered activities in Washington, not Texas.

Florida-based construction materials manufacturer Gardner-Gibson agreed to pay a $160,933 settlement to resolve allegations of customs laws violations, the Department of Justice said Jan. 20. Gardner-Gibson, which makes and imports products related to residential and commercial construction, allegedly imported a roofing underlayment product made in China without the proper country of origin labels. An individual brought the charges against Gardner-Gibson under the False Claims Act and said the company knowingly failed to apply country of origin markings on its imports in an effort to evade customs duties. The relator will receive 20% of the $160,933 payment, and Gardner-Gibson will also pay the relator's attorney fees of more than $40,000, DOJ said. “It is important that all U.S. businesses have a fair playing field,” said U.S. Attorney Brian Moran. “This case began with a relator alerting the government to the unlawful conduct, helping the government police the import marketplace to ensure fairness.” The settlement resolves allegations and there was no determination of liability, DOJ said.

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Jan. 11-17:

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Jan. 4-10:

The procedural stalemate in the Section 301 lawsuits inundating the U.S. Court of International Trade is traceable to Chief Judge Timothy Stanceu and his staff “really looking at everything very carefully,” Grunfeld Desiderio partner Ned Marshak said in an interview. His firm has filed about 800 of the 3,700 complaints, including a case filed Jan. 6 on behalf of flooring company R.A. Siegel based on a two-year statute of limitations running from a 2019 date of liquidation. All the complaints seek to vacate the lists 3 and 4A tariff rulemakings and get the duties refunded. Most of the actions based timeliness within the two-year statute of limitations dating to when List 3 was published in the Federal Register or when the tariffs took effect on Sept. 24, 2018. Fewer based the two-year window on dating to when List 3 tariffs were first paid.

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Dec. 28 - Jan. 3:

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Dec. 21-27:

Glue manufacturer Chemence and its President James Cooke will pay $1.2 million to the Federal Trade Commission as part of a settlement in the use of deceptive “Made in USA” advertising claims, the FTC said in a Dec. 22 news release. The FTC said it is “the highest monetary judgment ever for a Made in USA case.” The agency said the company's marketing violated an FTC order that was a result of a previous settlement over the same issue after the agency sued Chemence (see 1602030032).

The U.S. Court of International Trade granted a Department of Justice motion requesting leave to file an updated “schedule of cases” related to the first-filed HMTX Industries-Jasco Products Section 301 complaint, according to Chief Judge Timothy Stanceu's Dec. 22 order in docket 1:20-cv-00177. The motion “concerns overall case management of an unusually large volume of cases, none of which have yet been assigned to an individual Judge,” DOJ said. Roughly 3,700 cases have inundated the court, all seeking to vacate the lists 3 and 4A tariff rulemakings on Chinese imports and refunding the duties. The plaintiffs that responded to DOJ’s Sept. 23 motion (see 2009240026) for case management procedures have “generally agreed” that the cases other than the first-filed HMTX-Jasco action “should be stayed while a test-case procedure is implemented,” DOJ said. A schedule of pending cases attached to the motion was updated Dec. 22 and now spans 194 pages, and includes actions filed through Dec. 21.