The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the weeks of Oct. 3-9 and Oct. 10-16:
Jacob Kopnick
Jacob Kopnick, Associate Editor, is a reporter for Trade Law Daily and its sister publications Export Compliance Daily and International Trade Today. He joined the Warren Communications News team in early 2021 covering a wide range of topics including trade-related court cases and export issues in Europe and Asia. Jacob's background is in trade policy, having spent time with both CSIS and USTR researching international trade and its complexities. Jacob is a graduate of the University of Michigan with a B.A. in Public Policy.
The Court of International Trade in an Oct. 4 opinion ruled that CBP properly classified net wraps used for bailing hay as a warp knit fabric under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 6005.39.00. Judge Mark Barnett ruled against classification under plaintiff RKW Klerks' preferred subheading 8433.90.50 as "parts" of "harvesting or threshing machinery."
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Sept. 26 - Oct. 2:
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Sept. 19-25:
The Commerce Department migrated its review of whether Russia is a market economy from one antidumping investigation to another, Commerce said in a Sept. 19 notice. Commerce directed parties that had already made comments on the changed circumstances review in the original AD investigation to resubmit their comments and factual information for consideration to the new AD duty investigation. These entities, which include EuroChem Switzerland, Russia's Ministry of Economic Development, CF Industries Nitrogen and Wiley Rein, have until Sept. 28 to submit their comments.
Personal protective equipment manufacturer defendants, led by Smart Glove Holdings, failed to disclose they were under investigation by CBP for using forced labor, leading to over $68.5 million in damages to protective equipment supplier Airboss Defense Group (ADG), ADG said in a Sept. 19 complaint. Filing suit in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, ADG claimed that had it known about this investigation, it would not have agreed to source its gloves from Smart Glove and would have avoided the millions in charges, logistics costs and storage fees it incurred due to the imports being detained under a withhold release order (Airboss Defense Group v. Smart Glove Holdings, C.D. Calif. #2:22-06727).
The U.S. cannot seize or forfeit imports that are federally deemed "drug paraphernalia" but whose delivery, possession and manufacture were made legal at the state level, the Court of International Trade ruled Sept. 21. Judge Gary Katzmann found Washington state's move to make the marijuana-related drug paraphernalia legal allows interested parties to import the paraphernalia under the federal exemption laid out in the Controlled Substances Act.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Sept. 12-18:
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Sept. 5-11:
A group of domestic steel manufacturers doesn't have the right to intervene in a spate of challenges to denied requests for exclusions from Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled in a Sept. 8 opinion. Ruling against the Court of International Trade's opinion that the would-be intervenors did not establish standing, Judges Kimberly Moore and Todd Hughes ultimately found that the interveners nevertheless failed to identify a legally protectable interest to qualify as intervenors under the trade court's rules.