Jacob Kopnick

The Singaporean corporations that owned and operated the vessel that destroyed the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore will pay $101,980,000 to settle the government's civil claim against the companies for "costs borne in responding" to the bridge's collapse, DOJ announced on Oct. 24. The U.S. sought over $103 million under the Rivers and Harbors Act, Oil Pollution Act and general maritime law (see 2409190042). DOJ said the money will go to the U.S. Treasury and various federal agencies "directly affected" by the collision or involved in the response. The settlement doesn't include costs for reconstructing the bridge, since those efforts will be led by the State of Maryland (In the Matter of the Petition of Grace Ocean Private Limited, D. Md. # 24-00941).

The Court of International Trade in a decision made public Oct. 23 sustained the Commerce Department's rejection of eight Section 232 steel tariff exclusion requests from importer Seneca Foods Corp. on its tin mill product entries. Judge Gary Katzmann said the rejections were backed by substantial evidence and in line with agency practice.

Domestic steel producer Zekelman Industries filed a lawsuit on Oct. 21 in a Washington, D.C., federal court alleging that the Mexican government breached its 2019 agreement with the U.S. to slow imports of Mexican steel products. The company argued that Mexico's breach of the deal "has devastated the U.S. steel industry," forcing the company to close two plants due to the oversupply of cheap steel (Zekelman Industries v. United States, D.D.C. # 24-02992).

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Oct. 23 ruled that steel tubing with insulating material imported by Shamrock Building Materials is classifiable as steel tubes of heading 7306, rather than insulated conduit of heading 8547, subjecting the steel tubing to 25% Section 232 tariffs.

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the weeks of Oct. 7-13 and Oct. 14-20:

The Court of International Trade on Oct. 15 limited the scope of the testimony that will be offered by two of the government's witnesses in a customs spat on the classification of The Comfy, a wearable blanket imported by Cozy Comfort Co. Judge Stephen Vaden said fashion industry professional Patricia Concannon can testify only on topics related to the "sale, marketing, and merchandising of apparel," and that CBP national import specialist Renee Orsat "may not testify about opinions she formed during the Customs’ classification process."

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit last week held that tire retailer Texas Truck Parts & Tire was the "beneficial owner" of tires imported by Chinese manufacturers and, as such, is liable for excise taxes on the imports (Texas Truck Parts & Tire v. United States, 5th Cir. # 23-20588).

The Court of International Trade on Oct. 8 sustained the Commerce Department's scope ruling including importer Printing Textiles' "Canvas Banner Matisse" imports within the scope of the antidumping duty order on artist canvas from China. Judge Timothy Stanceu said Commerce's interpretation of one sentence of the order's scope that is ambiguous "was not per se unreasonable."

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Sept. 30 - Oct. 6:

The Court of International Trade on Oct. 7 denied importer Interglobal Forest's application for attorney's fees in its suit challenging CBP's affirmative finding of evasion of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on hardwood plywood from China. Judge Mark Barnett said that Interglobal wasn't a "prevailing party" in the action because the evasion determination was reversed without admitting to an agency error and only after the Commerce Department reversed its scope finding after separate legal action at the trade court.