The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:

The U.S. said Nov. 22 that a vehicle parts importer “misrepresented multiple primary sources” when it argued that, as a petitioner for antidumping and countervailing duty orders on chassis from China, it hadn’t intended Chinese-origin components used in chassis from another country be included (see 2403070060) (Pitts Enterprises, Inc. v. U.S., CIT # 24-00030).

Importers Struxtur and Evolutions Flooring will appeal a Court of International Trade case on the 2016-17 review of the antidumping duty order on multilayered wood flooring from China. The trade court sustained the Commerce Department's decision to weight average zero percent and adverse facts available antidumping duty rates to set the AD rate for the non-individually examined respondents (see 2409180044). CIT previously remanded Commerce's decision to use a simple average of the zero and AFA rates, instructing the agency to use a weighted average of the rates. The result was a 31.63% AD rate for the separate rate companies. Importers Wego International Floors, Galleher Corp. and Galleher LLC already filed their notice of appeal in the case (see 2411120038) (Fusong Jinlong Wooden Group Co. v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 19-00144).

Supporting its own motion for judgment (see 2407190048) in a case regarding the oft-litigated countervailing duties on South Korea’s low-cost provision of off-peak electricity (see 2406200062), the Korean government said Nov. 26 the opposition’s cited cases were distinct from the current situation (POSCO v. U.S., CIT # 24-00006).

Canadian lumber exporter J.D. Irving urged the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to reconsider its rejection of the company's attempt to challenge the denial of an antidumping duty cash deposit rate under Section 1581(i), the Court of International Trade's "residual" jurisdiction. Filing a petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc, J.D. Irving said the appellate court's decision is "grounded on a fundamental misunderstanding of the law and fact" related to its claim (J.D. Irving v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1652).

The following are short summaries of recent CBP NY rulings issued by the agency's National Commodity Specialist Division in New York:

The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:

In response to a U.S. opposition to its motion for judgment that included an accusation that it had fabricated a lab test (see 2410300052) -- after it itself claimed CBP had put the wrong test on the record (see 2406240048) -- an importer said Nov. 23 that DOJ had illegally “cited to matters from outside the record” (Vanguard Trading Co. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00253).

Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week, in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.

The Court of International Trade allowed tomato exporters NS Brands and Naturesweet Invernaderos to intervene in a case challenging the 1996 antidumping duty investigation on Mexican tomatoes, despite the request for intervention coming five years too late. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves held that the exporters, collectively referred to as NatureSweet, showed good cause for intervention, due to the unorthodox nature of the appeal, and properly articulated the basis for its intervention.