The Court of International Trade on Dec. 1 denied a Taiwanese exporter the chance to get a lower antidumping duty rate through an administrative review on solar products from Taiwan (here). Neo Solar Power had filed its request to participate in the review on March 3, 2016, several days after the deadline for requests for review on Feb. 29. It said the Commerce Department’s ACCESS system was down on Feb. 29, and a Taiwanese holiday that day meant it couldn’t mail a physical copy of the petition until March 3. Commerce said Neo Solar missed the deadline and declined to review the company, leaving it subject to the 19.5% all others rate. Neo Solar said the system outage and holiday were “extraordinary circumstances” and Commerce should give it a break. But CIT ruled that Neo Solar did not demonstrate that the system was out all day on Feb. 29, nor did its lawyer call the ACCESS help desk when it opened at 9:30 p.m. Taiwan time. The holiday was not unforeseen, so it wasn’t an extraordinary circumstance either, CIT ruled.
Court of International Trade
The United States Court of International Trade is a federal court which has national jurisdiction over civil actions regarding the customs and international trade laws of the United States. The Court was established under Article III of the Constitution by the Customs Courts Act of 1980. The Court consists of nine judges appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate and is located in New York City. The Court has jurisdiction throughout the United States and has exclusive jurisdictional authority to decide civil action pertaining to international trade against the United States or entities representing the United States.
Oil country tubular goods manufactured in Indonesia using Chinese green tubes as an input are not subject to antidumping duties on oil country tubular goods from China, the Court of International Trade said (here) as it sustained a Commerce Department scope ruling. Commerce had originally ruled the Indonesian finishing operations do not substantially transform the goods, saying they remain subject to duties on OCTG from China (see 14021124). However, the court found that logic to be unjustified in previous court rulings, and Commerce in its redetermination found that nothing in the scope of the China OCTG order covers OCTG from third countries. CIT also sustained Commerce’s decision that the OCTG from Indonesia are not circumventing AD duties because the finishing process in Indonesia is not minor or insignificant.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Nov. 21-27:
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Nov. 14-20:
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Nov. 7-13:
CBP will pay $72,222.32 as part of a settlement with a furniture importer that was mistakenly used as the importer of record and later assessed antidumping duties on an entry of wooden bedroom furniture from China, according to a settlement agreement filing with the Court of International Trade. The importer, Lifestyle Enterprise, challenged CBP in the CIT over a denied protest (see 1501290028) that left the company liable for antidumping duties (see 1502190058). CBP and Lifestyle agreed to the settlement "without reliquidating the entry subject to this action," according to the court filing. Lifestyle also agreed to seek a voluntary motion to dismiss with prejudice, abandon all other claims and cover its own litigation costs. Lifestyle originally sued for $144,444.64, the amount of the bill it received for the entry on which it was mistakenly listed as importer of record. A related lawsuit against the customs broker, which did not have a power of attorney from Lifestyle, was dismissed last year due to jurisdictional issues (see 1509210065). The Justice Department, Lifestyle and CBP didn't comment.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Oct. 31 - Nov. 6:
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Oct. 24-30:
The International Trade Commission does not necessarily need to consider the interests of importers when it decides whether to approve settlements between U.S. domestic producers and foreign exporters in antidumping and countervailing duty investigations, the Court of International Trade said in a recently released public version of the Oct. 5 ruling (here) that upheld recent suspension agreements on sugar from Mexico. The agency only needs to find that suspension agreements eliminate injury caused to domestic industry by dumping and illegal subsidization, and does not need to account for any negative effects caused by the suspension agreement itself, CIT said.
Court of International Trade Senior Judge Donald Pogue died on Oct. 26, the CIT confirmed. Pogue, chief judge from 2010 to 2014, was 69. He was appointed to the court in 1995 by President Bill Clinton and served on Connecticut's Superior Court before then, according to his CIT bio (here). "On behalf of [the Customs and International Trade Bar Association], I express our condolences to Judge Pogue’s family and colleagues," said Lawrence Friedman, president of CITBA. "He was an asset to the Court of International Trade and to the customs and trade bar. He was uniformly respected by all practitioners who appeared before him," Friedman said. "Personally, I always enjoyed my interactions with Judge Pogue both in the courtroom and at events outside the court. He always struck me as genuinely concerned about the parties and the lawyers that appeared before him and worked with him." CIT had no immediate comment.