The Court of International Trade on March 14 gave parties in a customs case filed by importer BASF Corp. an extra two weeks to file dispositive motions. BASF filed a consent motion on March 13 after fact and expert discovery wrapped up to give the parties more time to prepare a "statement of undisputed material facts." BASF added that its counsel has other cases before the court and federal agencies, requiring the extension (BASF Corp. v. United States, CIT Consol. # 13-00318).
Indian exporter Kumar Industries and the U.S. agreed that each should bear its own costs after Kumar withdrew its appeal at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in an antidumping duty case (Kumar Industries v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 24-1293).
The Court of International Trade in a confidential March 14 opinion remanded the Commerce Department's antidumping duty investigation on granular polytetrafluoroethylene resin from India. In a letter to the parties, Judge M. Miller Baker said he wants to publish a public version of the opinion March 19. U.S. manufacturer Daikin America brought the suit to contest Commerce's decision to accept respondent Gujarat Fluorochemicals' method for reporting its U.S. movement expenses (see 2205120026). Daikin said that Gujarat Fluorochemicals ignored Commerce's instructions to report its sales expenses on a transaction-specific basis, warranting adverse facts available, and that the agency illegally granted a constructed export price offset for the respondent (Daikin America v. U.S., CIT # 22-00122).
The Court of International Trade in a confidential March 14 order remanded the Commerce Department's antidumping duty investigation on oil country tubular goods from Argentina. In a letter to the litigants, Judge Claire Kelly said she wants to issue a public version of the opinion on or just after March 22. Exporters led by Tenaris Bay City brought the suit contesting Commerce's decision to start the investigation as not being backed by enough of the domestic industry (see 2310230051) (Tenaris Bay City v. U.S., CIT # 22-00343).
The U.S. on March 13 opposed importer Unichem Enterprises' motion to expedite its customs case on CBP's exclusion of its entries of 7-keto dehydroepiandrosterone, saying the company "has failed to establish good cause for expediting this action" (Unichem Enterprises v. U.S., CIT # 24-00033).
The Court of International Trade will ask parties in an oral argument in Section 1581(i) action set for March 20 if antidumping and countervailing duties can ever violate the 8th Amendment as an excessive fine if they are legally calculated. Issuing questions ahead of the argument, Judge Mark Barnett also asked about when exactly importer Greentech Energy Solutions was injured when its solar cell entries were assessed AD/CVD (Greentech Energy Solutions v. United States, CIT # 23-00118).
Arthur "Jack" Schubarth, a Montana rancher, pleaded guilty March 12 to conspiring to violate the Lacey Act and to violating the Lacey Act by illegally importing wildlife from Kyrgyzstan, DOJ announced. Schubarth worked for nearly a decade as part of a scheme to "create giant sheep hybrids" in the U.S. with the goal of selling them to "captive hunting facilities," DOJ said. He faces a maximum of five years in prison for each count and a fine of up to $250,000.
Generic drugmaker KVK Research pleaded guilty last week to charges that it "introduced adulterated drugs into interstate commerce" in violation of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, agreeing to pay $1.5 million in fines and forfeiture, DOJ announced.
Sai Keung Tin, a Chinese national, was indicted March 8 on four counts of illegally exporting eastern box turtles, a "protected wildlife species," from the U.S. to China for the "global pet trade black market," DOJ announced. Tin faces a maximum 10-year prison stint for each smuggling count.
Hyundai Challenges Commerce's de Facto Specificity Analysis on Korean Electricity in CVD Review Suit
Exporter Hyundai Steel Co. argued against the Commerce Department's finding that the South Korean government's provision of electricity for less than adequate remuneration is de facto specific in the 2021 countervailing duty review on cut-to-length carbon-quality steel plate from South Korea. Filing a motion for judgment on March 12, Hyundai claimed that the record doesn't show that the steel industry "received a disproportionately large amount of this subsidy" as required by a de facto specificity analysis (Hyundai Steel Co. v. United States, CIT # 23-00211).