The Commerce Department will decrease antidumping duty cash deposit rates in effect for three exporters of crystalline silicon photovoltaic products from Taiwan (A-583-853), implementing a recent Court of International Trade decision that ordered Commerce to recalculate rates set in an administrative review completed in 2017 (see 1707060028), it said. As a result of its recalculation, AD duty cash deposit rates for E-TON Solar Tech. Co., Ltd., Inventec Energy Corporation, and Sunengine Corporation Ltd., will fall to 3.78% (from 4.1%). The new rates will apply to subject merchandise entered on or after June 1, 2019.
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.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of May 27 - June 2:
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of May 20-26:
Printed goods are classifiable in chapter 49 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States if the printing has a communicative purpose, said the Court of International Trade in a decision issued May 14 and publicly released May 22. CIT found nine out of 10 models of silicone bands imported by Aero Rubber Company are classifiable as printed goods, but the court held the printing on one model is only decorative and classified it as plastic of chapter 39, CIT said.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of May 13-19:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on May 20 denied a bid by the U.S. government to lift an injunction banning imports of fish products from Mexican fisheries engaging in practices that threaten the vaquita porpoise (see 1807260039). The government had told CAFC that it has submitted several briefs to the Court of International Trade showing that the injunction is no longer necessary because of actions taken by the U.S. and Mexican governments, including a finding that a Mexican Gulf of California corvina fisheries doesn’t meet comparability requirements and should be declared ineligible for importation (see 1812030020). The Federal Circuit said CIT should have the chance to review the briefs before the appeals court takes up the case. “We are not convinced by the Government that the factual circumstances have changed so much as to warrant our dismissal of the preliminary injunction before reconsideration by the CIT,” it said.
The Court of International Trade on May 14 sustained a Commerce Department scope ruling finding m masonry anchors imported by OMG are not covered by antidumping duties on steel nails from Vietnam. Commerce had initially found the anchors subject to duties but, in response to a May 2018 CIT decision that found masonry anchors are not nails (see 1805290053), reversed its stance, albeit “under respectful protest.” “OMG’s zinc anchor is simply not a nail ‘constructed of two or more pieces’ because … it does not function like a nail and because record evidence demonstrates that anchors like OMG’s are considered a separate type of product from nails by the relevant industry,” CIT said as it sustained the re-determined scope ruling.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of May 6-12:
CBP and One World Technologies have agreed to settle a lawsuit on the agency’s seizures of the company’s imported garage door openers, the Court of international Trade said as it dismissed the case May 9. The settlement comes after an International Trade Commission administrative law judge recommended the ITC find the redesigned garage door openers aren’t covered by a Section 337 limited exclusion order issued in March 2018 (see 1803280024).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on May 8 affirmed a lower court’s denial of an injunction to an importer challenging the effective date of an antidumping duty increase. Sumec, an importer of solar cells, sought an order barring liquidation of its entries after a Court of International Trade decision that raised the rate of its exporter, but before notice of that increase was published in the Federal Register. CAFC, like CIT, held the order unnecessary because an injunction covering those entries has already been issued in another case and, even without an injunction, the government admits the entries should be liquidated if the importer wins the case.