The court should deny T-Mobile’s attempt to arbitrate legal claims stemming from the company shutting down its Sprint 5G network without properly alerting and compensating consumers, plaintiffs told the U.S. District Court for the Western Washington in a Nov. 3 filing (docket 2:22-cv-00843).

Plaintiffs in a conflict-of-interest suit at the Court of International Trade invoked three court decisions -- two from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and one from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit -- in a Nov. 9 notice of supplemental authority. The plaintiffs, led by Amsted Rail Co., said the cases were discussed during the hearing on the issue held at the trade court (Amsted Rail v. ITC , CIT #22-00307).

Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch in a Nov. 7 dissenting opinion railed against the court system's use of Chevron deference in a case over veterans' disability benefits. Breaking from his colleagues' decision on the petition for writ of certiori, Gorsuch decried the use of Chevron deference as the "kind of judicial abdication" that "disserves both our veterans and the law."

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

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 should give the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration a voluntary remand in a case seeking a Marine Mammal Protection Act ban on imports of fish and fishery products from New Zealand caught using techniques that allegedly have caused the near extinction of the Maui dolphin, the U.S. argued in a Nov. 8 motion. The voluntary remand would let the NOAA "amend the current comparability findings for certain New Zealand fisheries whose expiration dates conform with the deadlines set forth for other comparability findings to be issued under the Marine Mammal Protection Act and 50 C.F.R. § 216.24(h)," the government said (Sea Shepherd New Zealand v. United States, CIT #20-00112).

The rehearing motion from plaintiffs in an antidumping duty case, led by Ellwood City Forge, "appears to be little more than an impermissible attempt to relitigate an argument" already dispatched by the Court of International Trade, Judge Stephen Vaden held in a Nov. 8 opinion. Ellwood City sought reconsideration of the court's order tossing the challenge to the Commerce Department's failure to conduct on-site verification during an antidumping review, given that the plaintiffs failed to broach the topic administratively. Vaden said that Ellwood City misunderstood "the nexus between futility" and the requirement to exhaust administrative remedies.

International Trade Today is providing readers with the top stories from last week in case they were missed. All articles can be found by searching on the titles or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.

CBP did not do what it told the Court of International Trade it was going to do on remand in an Enforce and Protect Act case, plaintiffs Ikadan System USA and Weihai Gaosai Metal Product Co. argued in Nov. 4 comments on CBP's remand. The agency told the court it would consider the Commerce Department's scope ruling, which found that Ikadan and Gaosai's imports are within the scope of the relevant antidumping and countervailing duty orders, and clarify its decision to ensure the court is given a thorough analysis of the relevant law and evidence. Instead, CBP failed to address any of the plaintiffs' arguments on remand, the brief said (Ikadan System USA v. United States, CIT #21-00592).

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