Jacob Kopnick

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Jan. 9-15:

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Jan. 3-8:

The Court of International Trade in a Jan. 9 opinion denied the New Zealand government's bid to delay a preliminary injunction barring the import of certain fish taken from New Zealand's West Coast North Island multispecies set-net and trawl fisheries into the U.S. The New Zealand government requested the temporary stay of the PI to set up a traceability system that would help the govenrment identify the fish subject to the injunction. Judge Gary Katzmann said that the need to set up this system does not constitute a changed circumstance that would permit the modification of the PI.

Modified vertical shaft engines with a vertical take off shaft and a horizontal crankshaft fall within the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on vertical shaft engines between 99cc and up to 225cc and parts thereof from China (A-570-124/C-570-125), the Commerce Department said in a Dec. 22 scope ruling. The scope ruling applied to modified vertical shaft engines, "such as the modified R210-S engine manufactured by Chongqing Rato Technology Co."

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Dec. 26 - Jan. 1:

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Dec. 19-25:

A World Trade Organization dispute settlement panel found the U.S. violated global trade rules by requiring goods made in Hong Kong to be marked as being made in China. Submitting its ruling Dec. 21, the three-arbitrator panel found the U.S. measures inconsistent with the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, saying the U.S. failed to show the moves were made in response to an "emergency in international relations." The U.S. argued the change in the origin requirement was needed to safeguard American national security.

Cannabis and cannabis accessory importers now have a "strong legal argument with potentially broad applications to challenge CBP's seizures" of marijuana paraphernalia in light of two recent Court of International Trade decisions, Harris Bricken lawyer Adams Lee said in a Dec. 16 blog post. Both cases involved the question of whether an importer could enter marijuana-related drug paraphernalia into Washington state, given that marijuana was made legal at the state level but remained illegal federally. Lee said that given how the opinions were structured, a state law repealing a past prohibition on such products "could be enough of an 'authorization' by the state law to block the federal prohibition on importing drug paraphernalia."

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the weeks of Dec. 5-11 and Dec. 12-18:

The World Trade Organization issued a series of four rulings Dec. 9 finding that the U.S. Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs set by President Donald Trump violated global trade rules. In the landmark rulings, a three-person panel found that the duties violated Articles I, II, XI and XXI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. The dispute panel said the tariffs, which the Trump administration said were needed to maintain U.S. national security, were not "taken in time of war or other emergency in international relations," as mandated by Article XXI(b)(iii) of national security protections, so the duties violate the GATT.