The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
More than $14 billion worth of Chinese raw cotton and cotton and cotton blend textiles was exported in 2019 from five major textile companies with ties to Xinjiang forced labor, according to a recent British study, conducted with the help of international scholars and Chinese reviewers and partly funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). The study, called "Laundering Cotton: How Xinjiang Cotton is Obscured in International Supply Chains," analyzed shipping data from Bangladesh, Vietnam, India, Cambodia, Hong Kong, the Philippines, Pakistan, Kenya, Ethiopia and the U.S., tracing how goods went from China to one of those countries directly, or from China to Hong Kong to the foreign factory location, and then from there, to U.S. shelves.
The Court of International Trade, noting an impasse on a key jurisdictional question in a customs case in a Nov. 22 letter, gave the litigants 30 days to work out a solution on how best to proceed. Acknowledging the legitimacy of both sides' jurisdictional claims, Judge Jane Restani said that if the parties fail to resolve the matter in 30 days, then the plaintiff, FD Sales Company, has 10 days to amend its complaint (FD Sales Company LLC v. United States, CIT #21-00224).
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Court of International Trade should dismiss a challenge of CBP's alleged failure to issue full Section 301 refunds for lack of jurisdiction since the case was untimely filed, the Department of Justice argued in a Nov. 19 brief. Plaintiff FD Sales' rebuttal says that the 180-day deadline to file a case that runs from a protest denial does not apply in this case since CBP did not actually deny the protest, but that the protest can be considered denied in part due to CBP's failure to give the full refund. DOJ countered, in the case's most recent brief, that this argument must be rejected since it is "undisputed" that FD Sales filed its summons more than 180 days after the date of the decision (FD Sales Company LLC v. United States, CIT #21-00224).
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Nov. 15-21:
CIT Permits Ag Groups' Amici Brief in Case Over ITC Fertilizer Injury Determination Despite Pushback
The Court of International Trade permitted a group of U.S. agricultural trade associations to file an amicus brief in a case over the International Trade Commission's injury determination in an investigation into phosphate fertilizers from Morocco and Russia. After facing pushback from the U.S. and the petitioners, J.R. Simplot Company and The Mosaic Company, Judge Stephen Vaden said the amici "represent the actual users of that fertilizer, the farmers, i.e., those who ultimately pay the price of the tariffs imposed" (OCP S.A., et al. v. United States, CIT Consol. #21-00219)
Sales of goods warehoused in Canada to U.S. customers were not “domestic sales,” but sales “for exportation to the U.S. that should be appraised using transaction value, the Department of Justice said in a brief filed Nov. 19 at the Court of International Trade (Midwest-CBK, LLC v. U.S., CIT # 17-00154). The brief comes in reply to a filing from Midwest-CBK that argued CBP improperly valued the relevant entries because they were “domestic sales,” ordered by U.S. customers from Midwest-CBK’s U.S. sales force, and title transferred after delivery FOB in Buffalo (see 2111080068). DOJ said “domestic sales” is not a term found in the customs laws, and the sale meets all the requirements for a good sold for U.S. export.
Antidumping duty respondent Ajmal Steel Tubes and Pipes Ind. filed a complaint at the Court of International Trade over the Commerce Department's denial of part of its responses in an AD administrative review. The company challenges Commerce's rejection of its questionnaire responses for being untimely filed for being nearly two hours late, despite COVID-19-related technical difficulties. The decision was especially egregious since Commerce granted itself lengthy extensions to meet deadlines in the review, the company said (Ajmal Steel Tubes & Pipes Ind. LLC v. United States, CIT #21-00587).
Plans to update statutory language to allow for CBP to use advance cargo data "for any lawful purpose" is an early area of concern among trade groups that submitted comments to the office of Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., about a draft customs modernization bill (see 2111030039). That provision "is a significant amendment to the Trade Act of 2002 manifest requirements and will present a challenge regarding how the agency will merge and crosscheck data received from multiple parties," the Express Association of America told Cassidy, EAA Executive Director Michael Mullen said by email.