Three wildlife advocacy groups urged the Court of International Trade to compel the U.S. to comply with its settlement agreement with the groups by requiring the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) to bar the importation of fish and fish products from all harvesting nations that don't meet Marine Mammal Protect Act (MMPA) standards (Natural Resources Defense Council v. Howard Lutnick, CIT # 24-00148).
The Court of International Trade denied a group of importers' motion for a preliminary injunction against liquidation of their entries subject to tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act on the basis that the trade court has the power to order reliquidation of the entries if the Supreme Court strikes down the IEEPA tariffs.
The Court of International Trade approved amendments to one of its practice rules and two of its forms on Dec. 9. The changes, which affect Rule 74 and Forms 10 and 13, will become effective Jan. 5, the court said.
The Court of International Trade on Dec. 8 issued a statutory injunction against the liquidation of any unliquidated entries of importer IPG Photonics' heat sink models, while the importer challenges the Commerce Department's antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders scope ruling on IPG's products (IPG Photonics v. United States, CIT # 25-00212).
The Court of International Trade sustained the Commerce Department's surrogate value pick for ocean freight charges and its valuation of minor fabricated components in the antidumping duty investigation on mobile access equipment from China. Judge M. Miller Baker upheld the agency's decisions as reasonable after initially remanding both selections.
The Court of International Trade on Dec. 12 denied the government's motion for reconsideration of the trade court's previous decision to vacate CBP's finding that Dominican exporter Kingtom Aluminio made its aluminum extrusions with forced labor. Although Judge Timothy Reif said he made a mistake of fact in the initial decision, the mistake was a "harmless error," and that no mistake of law was made.
The U.S. on Dec. 11 filed its opposition to a motion for a preliminary injunction in dozens of cases filed by Crowell & Moring seeking refunds of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (AGS Company Automotive Solutions v. United States, CIT Consol. # 25-00255).
The following lawsuits were filed recently at the Court of International Trade:
The U.S. moved to toss a group of importers' counterclaims in a customs penalty case for failure to identify a proper "jurisdictional grant or cause of action," arguing that the companies should have raised their claims before the Commerce Department first (United States v. Lexjet, CIT # 23-00105).
A group of Ukrainian nationals on Dec. 10 accused Intel, Texas Instruments, Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) and Mouser Electronics of not doing enough to ensure the semiconductor parts they make don't end up in Russian or Iranian hands (Shumylo v. Texas Instruments, Tex. # 25-09714).