Five Republican Senators filed an amicus brief on Dec. 15 with the U.S. Supreme Court, urging it to take up a case over the limits of the president's authority under the Section 232 national security tariff statute. The brief, signed by Sens. Pat Toomey, R-Pa.; Mike Crapo, R-Idaho; Bill Cassidy, R-La.; Mike Lee, R-Utah; and Ben Sasse, R-Neb., argues against a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit opinion spurning time limits imposed in the statute. The time limits are crucial to ensuring that "Congress makes the major policy decisions regarding the regulation of foreign commerce," the lawmakers said.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that two entries of appearance for Department of Justice attorney Robert Kiepura are not in compliance with court rules, the Federal Circuit said in two Dec. 15 notices. The entry documents were filed after the cases had been assigned to a merits panel, so in order for them to be properly added to the cases, Kiepura must first file a motion for leave to appear, the appellate court said. One case is appealing a July 2020 Court of International Trade decision that upheld the Commerce Department's termination of an old suspension agreement on fresh tomatoes from Mexico (Confederacion de Asociaciones v. U.S., Fed. Cir. #20-2232). The other is challenging a September 2020 decision dismissing a challenge to the final antidumping duty determination on fresh tomatoes from Mexico (Bioparques de Occidente v. U.S., Fed. Cir. #20-2265).
Mediation at the Court of International Trade in six consolidated cases over Section 232 steel and aluminum tariff exclusion denials failed to produce a settlement, the court said in a Dec. 14 report. The mediation, held by Judge Leo Gordon, was ordered after the consolidated plaintiffs' request for a status conference was denied as moot. The plaintiffs wanted the status conference to discuss the availability of a remedy for already-liquidated entries (Valbruna Slater Stainless, Inc. v. U.S., CIT #21-00027).
Sonos supports recommendations of Chief Administrative Law Judge Charles Bullock at the International Trade Commission to slap Google with a cease and desist order, preventing it from circumventing the judge’s recommended import ban on smart speakers and other devices that he found to infringe five Sonos multiroom audio patents, said Sonos in redacted Dec. 2 comments (login required) posted Monday in docket 337-TA-1191. Google responded (login required) that the ITC should reject Bullock’s call for “sweeping remedial orders” that would deprive U.S. consumers of its “cutting-edge and life-enhancing household products.” The ITC scheduled a final decision for Jan. 6. The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative would have until early March to endorse or reject the ITC’s final determination, or take no action. The filings were the companies' last chance to state their case (see 2002060070).
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Sonos supports the recommendations of Chief Administrative Law Judge Charles Bullock at the International Trade Commission to slap Google with a cease and desist order, preventing it from circumventing the judge’s recommended import ban on smart speakers and other devices that he found to infringe five Sonos multiroom audio patents, said Sonos in redacted Dec. 2 comments (login required) newly posted Monday in docket 337-TA-1191. Google responded in its own redacted comments (login required) that the ITC should reject Bullock’s call for “sweeping remedial orders” that would deprive U.S. consumers of its “cutting-edge and life-enhancing household products.”
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Dec. 6-12:
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Court of International Trade set a date -- March 22, 2022 -- for in-person oral argument date to discuss importer Crown Cork & Seal's motion to dismiss the first two counts of a customs fraud case brought by the Department of Justice. DOJ launched its case following a 10-year investigation, seeking more than $18 million over misclassified metal vacuum closures, alleging fraud, gross negligence and negligence. CCS moved to dismiss these first two counts, holding that the U.S. only has the facts to support a claim of negligence (The United States v. Crown Cork & Seal, USA, Inc. et al., CIT #21-361).