The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The International Trade Commission is proposing to permanently adopt its COVID-19 era regulation that waived the need for paper filings of confidential and public documents in safeguard, antidumping and countervailing duty, and Section 337 proceedings. In a proposed rule released March 28, the ITC, at the request of the ITC Trial Lawyers Association and the Customs and International Trade Bar Association, proposed eliminating the requirement for paper copy submissions, except for complaints and complaint supplements and amendments in Section 337 cases. The regulation also removes "gender-specific language" found in the ITC's rules.
The International Trade Commission is proposing to permanently adopt its COVID-19 era regulation that waived the need for paper filings of confidential and public documents in safeguard, antidumping and countervailing duty, and Section 337 proceedings. In a proposed rule released March 28, the ITC, at the request of the ITC Trial Lawyers Association and the Customs and International Trade Bar Association, proposed eliminating the requirement for paper copy submissions, except for complaints and complaint supplements and amendments in Section 337 cases. The regulation also removes "gender-specific language" found in the ITC's rules.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
International Trade Today is providing readers with the top stories from last week in case they were missed. All articles can be found by searching on the titles or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of March 18-24:
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Judge Evan Wallach on March 25 deferred exporter Oman Fasteners' motion to dismiss an interlocutory appeal in an antidumping duty case to the three-judge merits panel assigned to the case. The appeal came from petitioner Mid Continent Steel & Wire from the Court of International Trade's decision to impose an injunction on the Commerce Department's AD cash deposits on Oman Fasteners' steel nail imports. Oman Fasteners moved to dismiss the appeal, claiming that since the injunction is no longer active since Commerce completed the next review of the AD order, there's no live controversy (see 2401300069). The trade court granted the injunction after finding the agency abused its discretion in setting a 154.33% AD rate on the exporter for narrowly missing a filing deadline (Oman Fasteners v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-1661).
Three companies challenging the International Trade Commission's injury finding on Mexican and Chinese rail couplers responded to the ITC's and the petitioner's opposition to their motion to consolidate their cases, arguing that the "result is to sandbag Plaintiffs." Dubbing the ITC's opposition to the consolidation a "highly unusual move," the three companies -- Amsted Rail Co., Wabtec Corp. and Strato -- said that the opposition is "procedurally dubious" and "entirely meritless" (Amsted Rail Ind. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00268; Wabtec Corp. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00157; Strato v. United States, CIT # 23-00158).
The Court of International Trade on March 21 sustained the Commerce Department's remand results in a countervailing duty case in which it "changed the way it calculated ocean freight." Since no party objected to the new calculation, Judge Jane Restani sustained the remand.
Judge Mark Barnett of the Court of International Trade indicated in March 19 oral arguments that he is leaning toward remanding a case about the application of an adverse facts available rate to an exporter that missed an unusual 10 a.m. filing deadline by five hours (Cambria Co. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00007).