The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Sept. 25 - Oct. 1:

New Jersey jewelry company 21st Millennium and two individuals "who own or control the business," Iqbal Virani and Aqib Virani, admitted to evading customs duties on gold jewelry imports, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of New Jersey announced. Per the terms of a settlement agreement, the company and the two owners also agreed to pay $1 million to the U.S. after admitting to evading over $400,000 in customs duties.

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Sept. 18-24:

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

Liquidation may not be final in cases where CBP is "acting at the behest of another agency," law firm Neville Peterson said in a Sept. 13 blog post commenting on the Court of International Trade's ruling in AM/NS Calvert v. U.S. In that decision, the trade court entries subject to Section 232 steel and aluminum duties may not be final, given that the case contests the applications of product-specific exclusions granted by the Commerce Department and not by CBP (see 2309070037).

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the weeks of Aug. 28 - Sept. 3 and Sept. 4-10:

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

The Forced Labor Enforcement Task Force (FLETF) violated the Administrative Procedure Act by failing to provide any rationale for adding Chinese printer cartridge manufacturer Ninestar Corp., along with eight of its Zhuhai-based subsidiaries, to the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (UFLPA) Entity List, the companies, led by Ninestar, argued (Ninestar Corp., et al. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00182).

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Aug. 14-20:

Law firm Alston & Bird agreed to resolve a dispute with Ohio-based Mark One Wipes regarding the company's claims that the firm gave it negligent legal advice related to the labeling of hand-sanitizing wipes imports. Mark One launched its suit in February 2022, claiming that the faulty advice led to injury, including the costs of making, shipping and storing a "useless product," reputational harm and lost profits.