On June 17, a convicted smuggler of dangerously bright vehicle headlights asked the Court of International Trade, on behalf of both himself and the U.S., for another three-month extension to continue negotiating the terms of a stipulated judgment in a customs penalty case (U.S. v. Chu-Chiang "Kevin" Ho, CIT # 19-00102).
The Commerce Department ignored the rulings in past cases when it reached de facto and de jure specificity findings regarding two broadly used Korean government programs, a Korean steel exporter said in a motion for judgment June 17 (POSCO v. U.S., CIT # 24-00006).
Court of International Trade Judge Timothy Reif, during June 13 oral argument, expressed skepticism at Turkish exporter Erdemir's bid to stay in court under Section 1581(i) in its case challenging the International Trade Commission's decision not to hold a reconsideration proceeding regarding whether Turkish hot-rolled steel flat products injured the U.S. market (Eregli Demir ve Celik Fabrikalari v. U.S. International Trade Commission, CIT Consol. # 22-00349).
A "back to basics" webinar on de minimis presented by CBP, which was watched by more than 1,900 in the trade community, didn't elaborate on the suspensions of customs brokers from Type 86, though CBP official Felicia Pullam said the agency has heard "a lot of concern in the trade community about this enforcement."
The Court of International Trade on June 20 said that the Commerce Department's amended antidumping duty finding, excluding Turkish exporter Colakoglu from the AD order on hot-rolled steel from Turkey, doesn't invalidate the International Trade Commission's five-year sunset review of the order.
Importer Vecoplan on June 17 dismissed one of its customs cases at the Court of International Trade regarding the classification of its grinding machines (Vecoplan v. United States, CIT # 20-00106).
The Court of International Trade dismissed importer Greentech Energy Solutions' challenge to antidumping and countervailing duties on Chinese solar cells to its Vietnamese solar cell entries for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under Section 1581(i), the court's "residual" jurisdiction.
SiriusXM falsely advertises its music plans at lower prices than it charges by embedding its subscribers’ monthly bills with an inconspicuous 21.4% “U.S. music royalty fee,” alleged four Oregon residents in an Unlawful Trade Practices Act class action Friday (docket 3:24-cv-00955) in U.S. District Court for Oregon in Portland. Kara Kirkpatrick and Gillian Maxfield of Portland, Anna DeMarco of Marcola and Cody Michael of Salem filed the suit. SiriusXM intentionally doesn’t disclose the fee to its subscribers, nor does it mention the fee in its advertising, “including in the fine print,” said the complaint. Once consumers have been lured to sign up, SiriusXM “prevents them from learning about its scheme by never thereafter sending them monthly or ongoing billing notices or invoices,” it said. All the while, SiriusXM “silently and automatically renews their subscriptions month after month and year after year,” it said. The complaint is the latest of several filed throughout the U.S. challenging SiriusXM’s pricing practices, including at least one case, Stevenson et al v. SiriusXM (docket 23-4018), that has reached the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (see 2312080023).
A plaintiff and glycine importer filed a brief June 13 at the Court of International Trade supporting inclusion into its case’s record a prior August 2033 scope ruling application, made by the plaintiff and denied by the Commerce Department, that the plaintiff said provided important context for its overall case (Deer Park Glycine v. U.S., CIT # 24-00016).
The Court of International Trade dismissed importer Greentech Energy Solutions' challenge to antidumping and countervailing duties on Chinese solar cells to its Vietnamese solar cell entries for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under Section 1581(i), the court's "residual" jurisdiction.