The Court of International Trade in a text-only June 12 order sent a customs case on importer Cozy Comfort's wearable blanket, the "Comfy," to trial after the company claimed that there was a genuine factual dispute at issue in the case. Judge Stephen Vaden ordered a bench trial for the case to be held Oct. 21 following oral argument on June 12 (Cozy Comfort Co. v. United States, CIT # 22-00173).

The U.S. asked the Court of International Trade on June 12 to order importer Rayson Global and its owner Doris Cheng to pay over $5.8 million for skirting antidumping and Section 301 duties on uncovered mattress innersprings from China as part of a default judgment against the two defendants (United States v. Rayson Global, CIT # 23-00201).

The Court of International Trade on June 12 rejected customs broker Seko Customs Brokerage's motion for an expedited briefing schedule on its motion for an injunction in its suit against CBP's suspension of the company from participation in the Entry Type 86 and Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism programs (Seko Customs Brokerage v. U.S., CIT # 24-00097).

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).

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.

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.

The Court of International Trade on June 10 signaled that CBP's practice of not notifying companies when they become subject to interim Enforce and Protect Act investigations could give rise to a due process claim should the company sufficiently allege that it suffered "specific enough harm." However, the court found that importer Phoenix Metal failed to allege that harm with enough specificity.

Customs broker Seko Logistics asked the Court of International Trade on June 7 for expedited briefing in its suit against CBP's suspension of the company from Type 86 filing and the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism. Seko said greater delay in the case "deprives the requested relief of much of its value" and sets "extraordinary hardship" on the broker (Seko Customs Brokerage v. U.S., CIT # 24-00097).

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a June 7 order affirmed the Court of International Trade's decision to sustain the Commerce Department's use of antidumping duty respondent Z.A. Sea Food's (ZASF's) Vietnamese sales to calculate normal value in an AD review on Indian frozen warmwater shrimp. The unanimous order from Judges Alan Lourie, Raymond Clevenger and Todd Hughes was issued without an accompanying opinion.

Judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit heard arguments June 6 in a lumber exporter's case. The exporter is challenging its 2020 cash deposit rate set by a 2019 review after the Commerce Department previously ordered liquidation of its 2019 entries at a lower rate carried over from 2018 (J.D. Irving v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-1652).