The Photronics display business in the fiscal fourth quarter “typically sees a slight seasonal decrease in demand,” but the normal seasonal decline in the quarter that ended Oct. 31 “was exacerbated by pockets of softness in some sectors, and a negative impact from U.S. trade sanctions against Huawei,” Chief Financial Officer John Jordan said on a Dec. 9 investor call. Photronics supplies photomasks to panel makers.
Paul Gluckman
Paul Gluckman, Executive Senior Editor, is a 30-year Warren Communications News veteran having joined the company in May 1989 to launch its Audio Week publication. In his long career, Paul has chronicled the rise and fall of physical entertainment media like the CD, DVD and Blu-ray and the advent of ATSC 3.0 broadcast technology from its rudimentary standardization roots to its anticipated 2020 commercial launch.
Lawyers for importers that have filed suit under the extensive ongoing Section 301 litigation have established an “informal” steering committee to manage the case, law firm Neville Peterson said in a Dec. 1 blog post, adding that the committee “confers with some regularity.” Most observers expect the U.S. Court of International Trade will pick the first-filed Section 301 complaint from HMTX Industries and Jasco Production as the lead case, and stay the roughly 3,700 other actions while HMTX is litigated, the law firm said.
Complaint filings at the Court of International Trade seeking to have the Section 301 lists 3 and 4A tariff rulemakings vacated and the duties refunded (see 2009210025) slowed to a trickle in November, with fewer than 10 filed within the last two weeks. Of the roughly 3,700 complaints filed since Sept. 10, about 140 have been filed since Sept. 24. That’s the two-year anniversary date of List 3 taking effect and was within the statute of limitations that many lawyers cited under court rules to establish the timeliness of their actions. A plaintiff must file an action within two years “after the cause of action accrues,” court rules say. Lawyers in the subsequent actions will try to establish that the clock started when their importer clients first paid the tariffs.
Law firm Husch Blackwell has no objection to a Department of Justice proposal to designate the first-filed HMTX Industries-Jasco Products complaint as a test case in the massive Section 301 litigation, but “there is no reason that it should be chosen as the only test case without further analysis,” it said Oct. 22 in a partial opposition to the government’s Oct. 19 motion for case management procedures (see 2010200022). It told the Court of International Trade that it represents 75 “individually named plaintiffs” of the “approximately 6000 plus” importers seeking to vacate the lists 3 and 4A tariff rulemakings and get the duties refunded.
Grunfeld Desiderio counseled clients in the Section 301 litigation to consider a “sliding scale” of options on filing timely complaints within the two-year statute of limitations window that qualifies importers to recover duties paid if the suits are successful, partner Ned Marshak said in an Oct. 19 interview. The firm filed more than 800 of the nearly 3,600 complaints inundating the Court of International Trade. Its Sept. 16 complaint on behalf of YC Rubber was the first to follow Akin Gump's suit for lead plaintiff HMTX Industries.
Chief Judge Timothy Stanceu of the U.S. Court of International Trade should “automatically stay” all but the lead HMTX Industries-Jasco Products complaint in the Section 301 litigation and designate HMTX-Jasco as the “test case,” the Department of Justice said in an Oct. 19 motion to adopt case management procedures. All the nearly 3,600 complaints inundating the CIT seek to vacate the lists 3 and 4A tariff rulemakings and get the duties refunded. The roster of complaints attached to DOJ’s motion takes up 187 pages.
The Section 301 tariff rulemakings typified the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative's “unreasoned decision making” that’s “impermissible” under the Administrative Procedure Act, the Consumer Technology Association argued in September 2018 comments on List 3 of the tariffs (see 1809070025) that draw strong parallels to the HMTX-Jasco litigation challenging lists 3 and 4A tariffs. CTA used Akin Gump to help draft the comments two years ago. It was where CTA first floated the idea of challenging the tariffs in court. The complaint Akin Gump drafted for CTA (see 2009220029) that the association never followed through on is seen as a template for the HMTX-Jasco litigation now ongoing.
Demand for connectivity tools to fill remote work and learning needs fueled torrid third-quarter import growth in laptops and tablets, according to Census Bureau statistics accessed Oct. 7 through the International Trade Commission’s DataWeb portal. Q3 brought healthy import growth to smartphones compared with Q2, but unit shipments lagged behind those of 2019's third quarter, consistent with forecasts showing 2020 unit declines from a year earlier. Vietnam solidified its position in both categories as a secondary country of origin to China.
President Donald Trump’s “many tweets” and statements from his administration are strong evidence the White House unlawfully imposed the lists 3 and 4A tariffs to boost the U.S. Treasury and not curb the allegedly bad Chinese trade behavior documented in the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative’s March 2018 Section 301 investigative report. So said the lawyer for two automotive components importers making the case that the tariffs are unconstitutional because only Congress has the power of taxation.
The thousands of complaints seeking to vacate the lists 3 and 4A Section 301 tariffs on Chinese goods and have the duties refunded warrant the Court of International Trade assigning the litigation to a three-judge panel instead of a single judge, Akin Gump said Sept. 30 on behalf of importers HMTX Industries and Jasco Products, in a court filing. The Department of Justice told Akin Gump it opposes the motion and will file a response, it said.