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 Nov. 8-14:
Importer Valeo North America's lawsuit seeking to compel the Commerce Department to issue a scope ruling should not be dismissed because, though Commerce did eventually issue a scope ruling, the ruling was not lawful, the company argued in a Nov. 15 brief at the Court of International Trade. Though Commerce argued that the scope ruling means CIT no longer has jurisdiction over Valeo's case, the importer says that scope ruling was invalid because it did not follow the framework set by Commerce's scope regulations (Valeo North America, Inc. v. United States, CIT #21-00426).
Transpacific Plaintiffs to Petition SCOTUS Over Decision Permitting Post-Deadline Section 232 Action
A key U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decision that found that the president can impose greater Section 232 national security tariffs beyond the 105-day deadline for action laid out in the statute is being appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. Transpacific Steel, Borusan Mannesmann and The Jordan International Company filed a petition Nov. 12 in an attempt to get the high court to side with the original Court of International Trade decision, which held that the president may not make such adjustments.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Importer Guangdong Hongteo Technology Co. filed a complaint at the Court of International Trade, contesting what is the proper classification for its aluminum fuel pump mounts. Hongteo is seeking a more favorable HTS subheading that would lower the duty rate for the mounts and remove the Section 301 China tariff liability from the imports. The entries, in particular, are "six components made chiefly of aluminum, used to mount fuel pumps onto certain automotive spark-ignition internal combustion piston engines" (Guangdong Hongteo Technology Co., Ltd. v. United States, CIT #20-03776).
The Environmental Protection Agency “showed no flexibility” on an upcoming requirement to submit entry data for imports of hydrofluorocarbons 14 days prior to importation (see 2109230054), despite concerns raised by the National Customs Brokers & Forwarders Association of America at a recent meeting with the agency, the trade group said in an emailed update.
CBP continued to find that Leco Supply Co. continued to evade antidumping and countervailing duties on wire hangers from Vietnam, after voluntarily requesting a remand from the Court of International Trade to reconsider the case. Submitting its results in a Nov. 10 filing at CIT, CBP included information not previously considered in its determination and also released revised public summaries of the business confidential information (BCI), in line with a recent CIT decision (Leco Supply, Inc. v. United States, CIT #21-00136).
Lawyers for DOJ and Section 301 sample-case plaintiffs HMTX Industries and Jasco Products, “in preparation for scheduling oral argument” in the case, should email the U.S. Court of International Trade by Friday disclosing any “scheduling conflicts that would preclude their attendance at the hearing” in January or February, said an order entered Wednesday in master-case docket 21-cv-52 (in Pacer). Akin Gump attorneys for HMTX and Jasco are to file final written arguments on Monday, the last item on the case calendar in an April 13 scheduling order. Wednesday’s order appeared to dash any possibility of oral argument before year-end, as some lawyers involved in the litigation had thought might happen. Several thousand complaints were filed in the massive Section 301 litigation since September 2020, all seeking to have the Lists 3 and 4A tariffs on Chinese imports declared unlawful and any paid duties refunded with interest.
Lawyers for the Department of Justice and Section 301 sample-case plaintiffs HMTX Industries and Jasco Products, “in preparation for scheduling oral argument” in the case, have until Nov. 12 to email the Court of International Trade about any “scheduling conflicts that would preclude their attendance at the hearing” in January or February of 2022, an order entered on Nov. 10 said. Akin Gump attorneys for HMTX and Jasco are scheduled to file their final papers with the court on Nov. 15. the Nov. 10 order appeared to dash any possibility oral argument would be held before year-end, as some lawyers involved in the litigation had expected, as an outside chance. Several thousand complaints have been filed in the massive Section 301 litigation since September 2020, all seeking to have the lists 3 and 4A tariffs on Chinese imports declared unlawful and any paid duties refunded with interest (In Re Section 301 Cases, CIT #21-00052).