DOJ asked the Court of International Trade to dismiss a case concerning CBP's errant liquidation of its entries of softwood lumber for lack of jurisdiction, in a Dec. 8 motion. Fraserview failed to file a protest contesting liquidation of its entries within the 180-day window, DOJ said, but the company had an available and adequate remedy under 28 U.S.C. § 1581(a) if it had filed a protest and challenged its denial (Fraserview Remanufacturing v. U.S., CIT # 22-00244).
The Court of International Trade in a Dec. 12 opinion dismissed a lawsuit from importer MS Solar on the Commerce Department's liquidation instructions issued after an antidumping duty administrative review for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Tossing the case without prejudice, Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves said the case, which was filed under Section 1581(i) -- the court's "residual" jurisdiction -- could not stand because relief would have been available under Section 1581(c). The judge said the "underlying issue in this case is an error" that affected the final results and not Commerce's liquidation instructions.
In a briefing to members of the European Parliament, the European Commission's top trade official, Valdis Dombrovskis, said he expects the negotiations with the U.S. over the discriminatory aspects of the Inflation Reduction Act to partially, but not fully, resolve EU concerns.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The U.S. cannot rely on the Commerce Department's post hoc rationalization of its decision to countervail glass subsidies in a countervailing duty review, plaintiff-appellants, led by Guangzhou Jangho Curtain Wall System Engineering Co., argued in a Dec. 5 reply brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The appellants also said that the government did not take new agency action in making its determination, showing a "kind of bait and switch decision-making" decried in a key Supreme Court case (Taizhou United Imp. & Exp. Co. v. United States, Fed. Cir. 22-2000).
Aluminum pair ramps imported by Central Purchasing, LLC (dba Harbor Freight Tools), are not covered by the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on aluminum extrusions from China (A-570-967/C-570-968), the Commerce Department said in a scope ruling dated Oct. 31. The ruling followed a February 2021 request from Harbor Freight to determine whether three models of aluminum pair ramps were covered by the orders.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Upholding the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that Twitter abetted terrorists because the platform was used by ISIS for recruitment (see 2211300073) would have a chilling effect on free speech, open numerous businesses to massive liability, and ignore the difficulties, costs and scale of content moderation, said amicus filings from the U.S Chamber of Commerce, CTA, CCIA and others in Supreme Court case Twitter v. Taamneh (docket 21-1496). “If that is a sufficient basis for liability, intermediaries will no longer be able to function as fora for others’ speech, and free expression will be the loser,” said a joint filing from the ACLU, the R Street Institute,the Reporter’s Committee for Freedom of the Press, the Center for Democracy & Technology, and others.
Aluminum pair ramps imported by Central Purchasing, LLC (dba Harbor Freight Tools), are not covered by the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on aluminum extrusions from China (A-570-967/C-570-968), the Commerce Department said in a scope ruling dated Oct. 31. The ruling followed a February 2021 request from Harbor Freight to determine whether three models of aluminum pair ramps were covered by the orders.