The EU filed a case at the World Trade Organization over China's restrictions on EU companies seeking redress in foreign courts over patent infringements, the European Commission said. The commission alleged egregious violations of EU patent protections on key technologies such as 5G by Chinese mobile phone manufacturers. If a company goes to a foreign court seeking to stop this patent infringement, the firm will face "significant fines in China," putting pressure on the company to settle for artificially low licensing fees, the commission said. The EU said China also uses "anti-suit injunctions" to prevent EU firms from protecting their patents.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Tobacco wraps importer New Image Global argued at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that the Court of International Trade should not have allowed the results of a flawed customs test into evidence. The importer is fighting for a lower excise tax on its tobacco wraps, which were classified by the government as roll-your-own tobacco, subjecting them to the excise tax. The wraps are made with ethanol, which "gasses off" when the package is opened and the wrap is exposed to air. New Image has argued that this process will shed between 10% and 13% of the wraps' weight by the time they reach the final consumer and notes that "any lab test that finds that sealed wraps gain weight in storage and transit from the Mexican factory to the United States is inherently unreliable" (New Image Global v. United States, Fed. Cir. #19-2444).
A lawsuit at the Court of International Trade filed by an individual who failed their customs broker license test was assigned to Judge Mark Barnett, in a Feb. 17 order. The case was filed by Shuzhen Zhong (see 220211002) without an attorney and requests a review of the six questions that Zhong appealed to CBP in the test. Zhong took particular issue with CBP's getting both her address and gender wrong when returning the results of her appeal. While no attorney is listed for Zhong, Luke Mathers of the Justice Department's International Trade Field Office appeared for the government (Shuzhen Zhong v. United States, CIT #22-00041).
The U.S. Court of International Trade should deny DOJ’s motion to add a November 2018 investigatory “update” report from the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative to the administrative record in the Section 301 litigation (see 2202160028) because the government failed to show USTR “actually relied on or considered” the report when it was deciding to impose either the Lists 3 or 4A tariffs on Chinese imports, said Akin Gump lawyers for sample-case plaintiffs HMTX Industries and Jasco Products in a partial opposition Wednesday in docket 1:21-cv-52.
The U.S. Court of International Trade should deny the Department of Justice's motion to add a November 2018 investigatory “update” report from the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative to the administrative record in the Section 301 litigation (see 2202160033) because the government has failed to show that USTR “actually relied on or considered” the report when it was deciding to impose either the Lists 3 or List 4A tariffs on Chinese imports, Akin Gump lawyers for sample-case plaintiffs HMTX Industries and Jasco Products said in a partial opposition brief filed Feb. 16.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
DOJ wants the U.S. Court of International Trade to include two documents that the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative “realized” were missing from the administrative record filed April 30 by the government in the Section 301 litigation, it said in a Tuesday motion to correct the record. USTR Assistant General Counsel Megan Grimball said in a declaration the documents were “inadvertently omitted.” DOJ said USTR discovered the omissions in the two weeks since oral argument Feb. 1.
The Department of Justice wants the U.S. Court of International Trade to include two documents that the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative “realized” were missing from the administrative record filed April 30 by the government in the Section 301 litigation, it said in a Feb. 15 motion to correct the record. USTR Assistant General Counsel Megan Grimball said in a declaration that the documents were “inadvertently omitted.” DOJ said USTR discovered the omissions in the two weeks since the Feb. 1 oral argument.
The Commerce Department abused its discretion by rejecting filings in antidumping duty and countervailing duty investigations that were submitted 21 and 87 minutes late, respectively, the Court of International Trade said in a pair of Feb. 15 decisions. Commerce's denials of the questionnaire responses from a Turkish exporter amounted to a "draconian penalty" on the AD/CVD respondent for an "inadvertent technical error by its counsel that had no appreciable effect" on the investigations, the court said. The result was a 53.65% dumping rate and 158.44% countervailing duty rate for the exporter.