Importer Amsted Rail Co. and its Mexican maquiladora affiliate ASF-K Mexico returned a conflict of interest suit against their former counsel, Buchanan Ingersoll partner Daniel Pickard to the Court of International Trade. Filing another complaint at the trade court after previous claims against the Buchanan partner fell short for jurisdictional reasons, ARC said Pickard "betrayed" the company by using its information against it in an injury petition on freight rail couplers from Mexico and China (Amsted Rail Co. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00242).
Aluminum trade groups are in disagreement on a trade remedy case on aluminum extrusions, with the Aluminum Association and its Mexican and Canadian counterparts telling U.S., Canadian and Mexican government officials that "the filing of a 15-country trade case, which includes Mexico, by a subsection of U.S. aluminum extrusion producers threatens to overshadow the longstanding coordination and partnership between the aluminum industries in the three countries."
The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The U.S. added two attorneys to its litigation team in the massive Section 301 case at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Filing an amended notice of appearance on Nov. 20, the government tacked on Melissa Patterson and Joshua Koppel -- two attorneys in DOJ's Civil Appellate Division -- to the appellee team for the U.S. (HMTX Industries v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1891).
A spotlight on Uyghur forced labor in auto parts manufacturing that began a year ago (see 2212060054) has not yet resulted in much action from CBP (see 2309210025), but forced labor researchers say that may not continue to be the case.
The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Court of International Trade on Nov. 17 upheld the International Trade Commission's critical circumstances finding on raw honey imports from Vietnam, which led to the retroactive imposition of antidumping duties on the products. Judge Leo Gordon said that legal and evidentiary claims from the plaintiffs, led by Sweet Harvest Foods, fell flat.
Importer Under the Weather's response to the U.S. motion to dismiss its customs suit on backpacking tents "rests on legal misunderstandings and a pleading standard that was abrogated over a decade ago," the government said in a Nov. 16 reply brief at the Court of International Trade. The U.S. said the issue in the case is not whether it is "theoretically possible for a claim to exist" but whether Under the Weather plausibly alleged that a one-sentence approval from an import specialist was the "functional equivalent of a protest review" (Under the Weather v. United States, CIT # 21-00211).
Solar cell importer Greentech Energy Solution cannot argue both that it suffered no injury on its goods until CBP issued a notice of action and that it was not required to file a protest with CBP since the agency's actions were purely ministerial, the U.S. argued in a Nov. 16 reply brief supporting its motion to dismiss. Addressing Greentech's claims that its actions were not untimely nor improperly brought under Section 1581(i), the Court of International Trade's "residual" jurisdiction, the government said Greentech's Administrative Procedure Act claim must identify the specific final agency action it is challenging (Greentech Energy Solutions v. United States, CIT # 23-00118).
The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices Nov. 16 on AD/CVD proceedings: