After its bid for a preliminary injunction was denied by Court of International Trade Judge Claire Kelly (see 2407260045), a customs broker fought Aug. 5 against a motion to dismiss its case, saying its complaint was ripe for litigation because CBP had already made the decision to deny its reinstatement to the agency's Entry Type 86 pilot (Seko Customs Brokerage v. United States, CIT # 24-00097).

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit last week affirmed the convictions of six companies for conspiracy to commit wire fraud, customs fraud and promotional money laundering. However, the court said the trial court failed to resolve the parties' dispute on the value of the companies' warehouses before finding that they "lacked the ability to pay" the over $1.8 billion judgment and "ordering a nominal payment schedule."

The Commerce Department on Aug. 2 said Vietnam will continue to be treated as a non-market economy in antidumping duty proceedings. Releasing the results of its review of the nation's market status, the agency said that despite "substantive reforms made over the past 20 years, the extensive government involvement in Vietnam’s economy distorts Vietnamese prices and costs," rendering them "unusable" for calculating the duties.

Importer King Maker Marketing told the Court of International Trade on Aug. 2 that the date of importation of its paper-wrapped cigarettes was the date on which the goods were withdrawn from a foreign-trade zone and not the date on which they entered the FTZ. As such, the company said in a complaint that its duty drawback claims weren't untimely, since they were filed within five years of the dates on which the goods were withdrawn from the FTZ (King Maker Marketing v. United States, CIT # 24-00134).

The Court of International Trade on Aug. 1 said the International Trade Commission didn't establish an agency practice of considering U.S. investments by foreign producers as a distinctive condition of competition for cumulation analyses. Judge Gary Katzmann rejected exporter BlueScope Steel's claim that the ITC departed from its past practice in cumulating Australian hot-rolled steel exports with other nations' shipments as part of the five-year sunset review of the antidumping duty order on the steel goods.

The Commerce Department on remand at the Court of International Trade revised the duty drawback adjustment for exporter Assan Aluminyum Sanayi ve Ticaret, resulting in a de minimis antidumping duty rate for the company in the AD investigation on common alloy aluminum sheet from Turkey (Assan Aluminyum Sanayi ve Ticaret v. United States, CIT # 21-00246).

Plaintiffs in the massive Section 301 litigation said the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in Loper Bright v. Raimondo, which overturned the Chevron principle of deferring to federal agencies' interpretations of ambiguous statutes (see 2406280051), is relevant to the consequential litigation concerning the lists 3 and 4A Section 301 duties (HMTX Industries v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-1891).

The U.S. brought a complaint July 31 against a limited liability company and its owner for dodging antidumping duties on steel hangers, which it alleged “decimated the steel wire hanger manufacturing industry, leading to the closure of many manufacturing facilities across the United States and the loss of hundreds of U.S. jobs” (United States v. Zhe “John” Liu, CIT # 24-00132).

The Court of International Trade again remanded the Commerce Department's decision to continue using adverse facts available against countervailing duty respondent The Ancientree Cabinet Co. related to its alleged receipt of benefits under China's Export Buyer's Credit Program. In a July 22 decision made public July 30, Judge Richard Eaton instructed the agency to "determine a customer-specific rate that excludes" the EBCP subsidy amount for Ancientree's U.S buyers "whose non-use" of the program was verified.

The Court of International Trade on July 30 sustained the Commerce Department's decision on remand to remove exporter Nagase's compensation for payment expense from the company's general and administrative expense ratio. Judge Stephen Vaden also said that Nagase failed to exhaust its administrative remedies pertaining to its challenge to Commerce's assessment rate in the first review of the antidumping duty order on glycine from Japan.