Lawyers for the Section 301 test-case plaintiffs HMTX Industries and Jasco Products have until Sept. 14 to file their response to the Aug. 1 remand results on the lists 3 and 4A tariffs from the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, said an Aug. 15 scheduling order from the three-judge panel at the Court of International Trade. DOJ’s reply is due 44 days later, by Oct. 28, the order said. The two sides, in a joint status report, had agreed on the Sept. 14 date for the plaintiffs to respond to USTR’s remand results, but the government asked for 60 days to Nov. 14 to file its reply, while the plaintiffs asked for the government's reply within 30 days, by Oct. 14.

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Aug. 8-14:

Plaintiffs in an antidumping duty case will appeal a Court of International Trade decision upholding the rate calculated for non-individually investigated respondents in an antidumping duty administrative review on steel nails from Taiwan (see 2206170040). PrimeSource Building Products and consolidated plaintiffs Cheng Ch International Co., Ltd., China Staple Enterprise Corporation, De Fasteners Inc., Hoyi Plus Co., Ltd., Liang Chyuan Industrial Co., Ltd., Trim International Inc., UJL Industries Co., Ltd., Yu Chi Hardware Co., Ltd., and Zon Mon Co., Ltd. will take the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, according to two notices of appeal filed Aug. 12. In the June 16 opinion, the trade court found the plaintiffs did not provide enough evidence to to establish that the expected method -- the practice of averaging adverse facts available rates in the absence of non-AFA, zero or de minimis margins -- should not be used (PrimeSource Building Products v. U.S. CIT #20-03911).

The U.S. should better regulate the cryptocurrency industry to increase sanctions compliance, but not in a way that inhibits innovation, companies and trade groups told the Treasury Department in comments released this month. Some commenters said Treasury should issue more guidance to help firms better understand their compliance obligations and help digital assets from being used to evade global sanctions.

Lawyers for the Section 301 test-case plaintiffs HMTX Industries and Jasco Products have until Sept. 14 to file their response to the Aug. 1 remand results on the lists 3 and 4A tariffs from the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, said an Aug. 15 scheduling order from the three-judge panel at the Court of International Trade. DOJ’s reply is due 44 days later, by Oct. 28, the order said. The two sides, in a joint status report, had agreed on the Sept. 14 date for the plaintiffs to respond to USTR’s remand results, but the government asked for 60 days to Nov. 14 to file its reply, while the plaintiffs asked for the government's reply within 30 days, by Oct. 14.

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

Plaintiffs in an antidumping duty case, led by Ellwood City Forge, shouldn't be allowed reconsideration at the Court of International Trade following the dismissal of their case challenging the Commerce Department's failure to conduct verification in an antidumping duty investigation due to COVID-19 travel restrictions, the government said in an Aug. 11 response motion (Ellwood City Forge v. United States, CIT #21-00073).

Two importers each will pay seven-figure sums to settle False Claims Act lawsuits related to the undervaluation of their customs entries and underpayment of duties, DOJ said Aug. 11. Apparel importer Luchiano Visconti and its manager, Sasha Hourizadeh, will together pay $3.64 million to settle allegations they sent fraudulent invoices to their customs broker that understated the actual price paid. In a separate settlement, Eos Energy Storage will pay $1.02 million to resolve allegations that it failed to declare assists and other additions to transaction value.

The International Trade Commission voted Aug. 8 to open a modification proceeding on Google’s July 14 petition that Pixel smartphones, tablets, laptops and other devices installed with a new “device utility app” no longer infringe an October 2019 Sonos patent (10,439,896) on wirelessly connecting devices in a home network and should be removed from standing cease and desist and limited exclusion orders, said a notice for Friday’s Federal Register. Sonos filed an opposition to Google’s petition July 25, said the notice. The ITC has assigned the proceeding to Chief Administrative Law Judge Clark Cheney, who will render a “recommended determination” by Feb. 13, it said. Customs and Border Protection ruled in June that some Google device imports continued to infringe Sonos multiroom audio patents in violation of the ITC’s Jan. 6 import ban, ordering Google to disable the original device utility app in those devices and install a new app (see 2206290001).

Public interest statements are due Aug. 23 in two potential Section 337 investigations into imported voice controllable audio player devices by the International Trade Commission, according to a pair of Federal Register notices (ITC Inv. Nos. 337-TA-3634 and -3635). The solicitation follows the Aug. 9 receipt by the ITC of two complaints by Google alleging infringement of seven of its patents by Sonos.