The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Importer Root Sciences will appeal an October 2021 Court of International Trade opinion that said that the court did not have jurisdiction over CBP's seizure of Root's goods. According to the May 13 notice of appeal, Root will take its case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In the opinion, the trade court ruled that since the seizure of an import does not deem a product excluded, thus precluding any protestable event, jurisdiction is barred at CIT for seized goods (see 2110070022). Root filed the case after CBP seized one of its cannabis crude extract recovery machines as "drug paraphernalia" (Root Sciences v. United States, CIT #21-00123).
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Court of International Trade assigned two customs actions brought by Beverly Hills watchmaker Ildico to Judge Jane Restani, the court said in two May 12 orders. Ildico filed the case to argue that its imported wristwatches within gold bezels and cases and with synthetic sapphires on front and back should be classifiable as wrist watches with precious metal cases of heading 9101, rather than as CBP liquidated them under subheading 9102 as other wrist watches (see 2204290030) (Ildico Inc. v. U.S., #18-00076, -00136).
The "text, structure, purpose, and history" of the Section 201 statute all reveal that Congress did not intend for the Court of International Trade's strict reading of the president's authority to modify safeguard duties, the U.S. argued in its May 11 opening brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. DOJ is fighting to reverse a ruling at CIT that found that the law only permits trade liberalizing alterations to existing safeguard measures (Solar Energy Industries Association v. United States, Fed. Cir. #22-1392).
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Net wraps used to bind agricultural products in round bales can't be classified as agricultural machinery, and are more akin to thread in a sewing machine or paper in a printer, DOJ said in a brief filed May 10 at the Court of International Trade. The motion for summary judgment asks CIT Judge Mark Barnett to rule against a motion for summary judgement filed by importer RKW Klerks (see 2203150049), and find the net wraps are knit fabrics rather than agricultural machine parts (RKW Klerks Inc. v. United States, CIT #20-00001).
The Commerce Department's remand results finding that a South Korean authority did not provide electricity below cost in a countervailing duty investigation does not properly apply an "adequate remuneration" standard, plaintiff-appellant Nucor Corp. told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Filing its opening brief in its appeal, Nucor said that while Commerce does identify an adequate remuneration standard that could address the Federal Circuit's prior holding on the agency's sole reliance on a preferential rates analysis, the standard is not properly applied (POSCO v. United States, Fed. Cir. #22-1525).
The Commerce Department properly relied on a questionnaire instead of conducting on-site verification due to COVID-19-related travel restrictions, the U.S. argued in a May 10 reply brief at the Court of International Trade. The plaintiffs, led by Ellwood City Forge, didn't take issue with the verification methodology until litigation and the methodology is in line with Commerce's actions in prior crises, so the questionnaire should be sustained, Commerce argued (Ellwood City Forge Company v. U.S., CIT #21-00007).
If the International Trade Commission opens a Tariff Act Section 337 investigation into Broadband iTV (BBiTV) allegations against Altice, Comcast and Charter, the cable companies want the ITC to use its 100-day early disposition program to determine if BBiTV satisfies the domestic industry requirement of its patent infringement complaint, they said in a filing posted Monday in docket 337-3616. BBiTV alleges set-tops from the three companies infringe four patents on VOD and electronic program guide technologies, and seeks cease and desist and limited exclusion orders against the infringing devices (see 2204280027). An ITC Section 337 complainant must show that a domestic industry exists for its asserted patents or is in the process of being established. “BBiTV does not contribute to any domestic industry in the asserted patents,” but instead relies entirely on investments made by third-party licensee Dish Network, and only between Dec. 10 and Dec. 31, “to support its allegations of a domestic industry,” said the cable companies. ITC case law shows “abbreviated” license periods call into doubt the “sufficiency” of domestic law allegations, they said. BBiTV is “a non-practicing entity that does not make any products on its own,” but rather sues other companies “to extract settlement licenses,” they said. Dish “only recently executed its license to the asserted patents to resolve litigation brought against it by BBiTV,” they said. BBiTV didn’t comment Tuesday, nor did Dish, which isn't a party to BBiTV’s complaint.