The U.S. Court of International Trade granted DOJ’s second motion requesting leave to file an updated “schedule of cases” related to the first-filed HMTX Industries-Jasco Products Section 301 complaint, said Chief Judge Timothy Stanceu's order (in Pacer) Tuesday in docket 1:20-cv-00177. The motion “concerns overall case management of an unusually large volume of cases, none of which have yet been assigned to an individual Judge,” said DOJ's Tuesday motion. Roughly 3,700 cases have inundated the court, all seeking to vacate the Lists 3 and 4A tariff rulemakings on Chinese imports and refund the duties. The plaintiffs who responded to DOJ’s Sept. 23 motion (in Pacer) for case management procedures have “generally agreed” the cases other than the HMTX-Jasco action “should be stayed while a test-case procedure is implemented,” said DOJ. The revised schedule of pending cases (in Pacer) attached to the motion spans 194 pages and includes actions filed through Monday. Cases have continued trickling, at least one a day. All assert timeliness under the court’s two-year statute of limitations, dating to first payment of the List 3 tariffs upon the entry of goods in 2018.
The U.S. Court of International Trade granted a Department of Justice motion requesting leave to file an updated “schedule of cases” related to the first-filed HMTX Industries-Jasco Products Section 301 complaint, according to Chief Judge Timothy Stanceu's Dec. 22 order in docket 1:20-cv-00177. The motion “concerns overall case management of an unusually large volume of cases, none of which have yet been assigned to an individual Judge,” DOJ said. Roughly 3,700 cases have inundated the court, all seeking to vacate the lists 3 and 4A tariff rulemakings on Chinese imports and refunding the duties. The plaintiffs that responded to DOJ’s Sept. 23 motion (see 2009240026) for case management procedures have “generally agreed” that the cases other than the first-filed HMTX-Jasco action “should be stayed while a test-case procedure is implemented,” DOJ said. A schedule of pending cases attached to the motion was updated Dec. 22 and now spans 194 pages, and includes actions filed through Dec. 21.
The U.S. Court of International Trade granted DOJ’s second motion requesting leave to file an updated “schedule of cases” related to the first-filed HMTX Industries-Jasco Products Section 301 complaint, said Chief Judge Timothy Stanceu's order (in Pacer) Tuesday in docket 1:20-cv-00177. The motion “concerns overall case management of an unusually large volume of cases, none of which have yet been assigned to an individual Judge,” said DOJ's Tuesday motion. Roughly 3,700 cases have inundated the court, all seeking to vacate the Lists 3 and 4A tariff rulemakings on Chinese imports and refund the duties. The plaintiffs who responded to DOJ’s Sept. 23 motion (in Pacer) for case management procedures have “generally agreed” the cases other than the HMTX-Jasco action “should be stayed while a test-case procedure is implemented,” said DOJ. The revised schedule of pending cases (in Pacer) attached to the motion spans 194 pages and includes actions filed through Monday. Cases have continued trickling, at least one a day. All assert timeliness under the court’s two-year statute of limitations, dating to first payment of the List 3 tariffs upon the entry of goods in 2018.
The U.S. Court of International Trade granted DOJ’s second motion requesting leave to file an updated “schedule of cases” related to the first-filed HMTX Industries-Jasco Products Section 301 complaint, said Chief Judge Timothy Stanceu's order (in Pacer) Tuesday in docket 1:20-cv-00177. The motion “concerns overall case management of an unusually large volume of cases, none of which have yet been assigned to an individual Judge,” said DOJ's Tuesday motion. Roughly 3,700 cases have inundated the court, all seeking to vacate the Lists 3 and 4A tariff rulemakings on Chinese imports and refund the duties. The plaintiffs who responded to DOJ’s Sept. 23 motion (in Pacer) for case management procedures have “generally agreed” the cases other than the HMTX-Jasco action “should be stayed while a test-case procedure is implemented,” said DOJ. The revised schedule of pending cases (in Pacer) attached to the motion spans 194 pages and includes actions filed through Monday. Cases have continued trickling, at least one a day. All assert timeliness under the court’s two-year statute of limitations, dating to first payment of the List 3 tariffs upon the entry of goods in 2018.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Dec. 14-20:
Google got slapped Thursday with another antitrust lawsuit, this time from 35 states, the District of Columbia, Guam and Puerto Rico (see 2012170037). As with states’ lawsuit against Facebook last week (see 2012100003), attorneys general from both parties in most states joined the complaint against Google, alleging the search firm violated Sherman Antitrust Act Section 2. Google said the AGs would harm search results at businesses’ cost.
Google got slapped Thursday with another antitrust lawsuit, this time from 35 states, the District of Columbia, Guam and Puerto Rico (see 2012170037). As with states’ lawsuit against Facebook last week (see 2012100003), attorneys general from both parties in most states joined the complaint against Google, alleging the search firm violated Sherman Antitrust Act Section 2. Google said the AGs would harm search results at businesses’ cost.
Thirty-plus states sued Google Thursday. Colorado, Nebraska, Arizona, Iowa, New York, North Carolina, Illinois, Kansas, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, the Dakotas, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania and Virginia were among them and the District of Columbia also signed on. They allege the company violated Sherman Antitrust Act Section 2.
Thirty-plus states sued Google Thursday. Colorado, Nebraska, Arizona, Iowa, New York, North Carolina, Illinois, Kansas, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, the Dakotas, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania and Virginia were among them and the District of Columbia also signed on. They allege the company violated Sherman Antitrust Act Section 2.
A federal grand jury in Houston indicted eight for criminal wire fraud and entry of goods by means of false statements for allegedly evading antidumping and countervailing duties by undervaluation and falsely declaring exporters with lower rates, the Department of Justice said in a Dec. 15 news release.