Jacob Kopnick

The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:

The U.S. and exporter Kaptan Demir told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that the Commerce Department "is afforded substantial deference in interpreting" whether an input is "primarily dedicated" to the production of its downstream product for purposes of assigning subsidies given to the input supplier to the downstream product maker (Kaptan Demir Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 24-1431).

Antidumping duty petitioner Mid Continent Steel & Wire urged the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to reject exporter Oman Fasteners' notice of supplemental authority regarding a Court of International Trade ruling on the Commerce Department's filing deadlines (Oman Fasteners v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-1661).

Chinese citizen Zhenyu "Bill" Wang and Texas resident Daniel Ray Lane were sentenced to 45 months in prison for trying to violate U.S. sanctions and commit money laundering as part of a scheme to "transact in sanctioned petroleum and launder the proceeds," DOJ announced.

The Court of International Trade in a confidential decision granted the government's motion to dismiss a case from importer Greentech Energy Solutions for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Judge Mark Barnett gave the parties until June 17 to review the confidential decision so the court can publish the opinion. Greentech brought the suit under Section 1581(i), the court's "residual" jurisdiction, to contest the antidumping and countervailing duties on its solar cell entries from Vietnam, claiming that the lack of dumping, subsidization or injury finding on Vietnamese solar cells made the duties illegal (see 2306130025). The U.S. said the court didn't have jurisdiction to hear the case since Greentech should have filed a protest with CBP first to contest the duties (see 2312260052) (Greentech Energy Solutions v. United States, CIT # 23-00118).

Exporter Oman Fasteners said a recent Court of International Trade decision on the Commerce Department's filing deadlines supports its claim at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that one "inadvertent missed deadline 'without more'" doesn't support the use of adverse facts available in an antidumping duty case. Oman Fasteners filed a notice of supplemental authority on June 10 calling the appellate court's attention to CIT's holding in Cambria Co. v. U.S. (Oman Fasteners v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-1661).

The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:

The Court of International Trade on June 11 sustained the Commerce Department's remand results in an antidumping duty investigation on Indonesian biodiesel after the agency disregarded Indonesian crude palm oil prices when constructing normal value for respondent Wilmar Trading.

The U.S. told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on June 10 that the Court of International Trade correctly found that sales between Canada-based Midwest-CBK and its U.S. customers met the requirement of being sold "for exportation into the United States" and thus were properly liquidated using transaction value with a 75.75% "uplift" to the goods' valuation. Goods are meant for export to the U.S. when they are "clearly destined for the United States at the time of the sale," which the goods at issue were, the government said (Midwest-CBK v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 24-1142).

Honeywell International on June 7 moved to unseal various pleadings in its customs case on the classification of chordal, radial and web brake segments used in aircraft wheel and brake assemblies. The importer moved to unseal its motion for summary judgment and five of seven exhibits accompanying the motion. Honeywell said the government consented to the motion (Honeywell International v. United States, CIT # 17-00256).