The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Aluminum industry trade group European Aluminum, filed two lawsuits with the European Union General Court to challenge the nine-month suspension of the antidumping duties on aluminum flat-rolled products from China, the trade association said in a Dec. 20 press release. The group called the suspension "unjustified" and pointed to the alleged "damaging impact" such a move can have on the European industry. The first case challenges the suspension decision from the European Commission itself, while the second goes after the non-collection of the provisional antidumping duties that were already imposed at the time of the suspension.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Court of International Trade on Dec. 22 again remanded the Commerce Department's second remand results in the antidumping duty investigation of steel nails from Oman. The second remand results had been filed in response to a Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit opinion that said Commerce didn't adequately explain its reliance on a financial statement from Hitech Fastener Manufacturer (Thailand) Co. -- a third-country company -- to calculate constructed-value profit since Commerce didn't adequately consider whether Hitech had received countervailable subsidies. CIT Judge Mark Barnett found Commerce's decision to stick with Hitech's financial statement wasn't in compliance with the Federal Circuit.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Dec. 13-19:
The Commerce Department's use of adverse facts available in a countervailing duty review over the respondents' alleged use of China's Export Buyer's Credit Program is not backed by sufficient evidence, nonselected respondent Evolutions Flooring and Struxtur said in a Dec. 20 complaint. Filing at the Court of International Trade, the companies also contested Commerce's calculations for various inputs' less-than-adequate remuneration programs (Evolutions Flooring v. U.S., CIT #21-00591).
Export Compliance Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week in case you missed them. You can find any article by searching the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
An extension of the scheduling order isn't needed in a countervailing duty case, brought by The Mosaic Company, after the Court of International Trade granted a litigant's motion to amend its complaint to add a new claim, the litigants told the court in a Dec. 17 letter. Consolidated plaintiff Industrial Group Phosphorite sought to amend its complaint in the action to add a single count challenging the Commerce Department's de facto specificity determination over the alleged natural gas subsidy program. In a Nov. 19 order, Judge Jane Restani granted the amendment despite opposition from other litigants (The Mosaic Company, et al. v. United States, CIT #21-00117). The overarching case concerns Commerce's final results in the countervailing duty investigation of phosphate fertilizers from Russia. In the letter to Restani, though, Mosaic said that it conferred with the other parties, and they all agreed that no further amendment to the briefing schedule is necessary. "In light of that argument’s short length, and considering February 2022 deadlines Mosaic faces in other cases before the Court that would necessitate substantial extensions of the deadlines in this case if extensions were to be of any practical value, Mosaic believes amendment of the scheduling order is not warranted at this time," the letter said.