The government hasn't justified its decision to keep a vast majority of the information confidential as part of Chinese printer cartridge maker Ninestar Corp.'s case against its placement on the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act Entity List, Ninestar argued. Filing its opposition to the U.S.'s motion to enter an amended protective order on Oct. 23 at the Court of International Trade, the exporter said the motion would "give the Government essentially unreviewable discretion to seal information, placing it beyond Ninestar's review" and is just "another bid for delay and distraction" (Ninestar Corp. v. United States, CIT # 23-00182).
Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.
NetChoice believes its court challenge to SB-396, the Arkansas age-verification Social Media Safety Act, “is appropriate for resolution as a matter of law,” and it therefore “intends to file an early dispositive motion” to that effect, said its position statement in a joint Rule 26(f) report Monday (docket 5:23-cv-05105) in U.S. District Court for Western Arkansas in Fayetteville.
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Kazakh silicon metal exporter Tau-Ken Temir (TKT) and the Kazakh Ministry of Trade and Integration asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit for 7,000 more words for its reply brief in a case on the countervailing duty investigation on silicon metal from Kazakhstan. The exporter and the government agency said they need double its current word count to respond to the reply briefs filed by the U.S. and the petitioners, which collectively are over 20,000 words (Tau-Ken Temir v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 22-2204).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in an Oct. 20 order granted the U.S. request for 55 more days to file its reply brief in the massive Section 301 litigation, despite an objection from the plaintiff-appellants, led by HMTX Industries. The government's reply brief is now due Dec. 21 following the extension, which was the second of its kind following a 60-day extension (HMTX Industries v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1891).
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Oct. 16-22:
A suit filed to contest the classification of photoresists and other chemical products should be tossed because the complaint was filed more than nine years after the denial of protests, DOJ said in an Oct. 20 motion to dismiss at the Court of International Trade (Tokyo Ohka Kogyo America v. U.S., CIT # 21-00371).
The Commerce Department wasn't required to issue exporter Jin Tiong Electrical Materials Manufacturer a questionnaire for purposes of giving the company a separate antidumping duty rate, the U.S. government told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in an Oct. 20 reply brief. The government said 19 U.S.C. § 1677f-1(c)(1) -- the statute relied on by Jin Tiong to claim that Commerce can't limit the number of respondents when the number is small -- doesn't speak to a process that Commerce must follow in carrying out its separate rate examinations (Repwire v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1933).
The Court of International Trade in an Oct. 20 opinion granted exporter Midwest-CBK's motion to ditch its case on whether sales from a Canadian warehouse to U.S. customers are sales for export to the U.S. or domestic sales. Following a prior CIT ruling finding that the company's imports are sales "for exportation to the United States" and that the goods were not deemed liquidated, the case shifted to how to value the goods.