The Court of International Trade on July 23 said CBP didn't have the authority to extend an order from the court enjoining liquidation of various entries to imports entered by Acquisition 362, doing business as Strategic Import Supply. Judge Mark Barnett dismissed the case for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, finding that because Acquisition 362 wasn't a party to a separate case challenging the antidumping duty rate assessed on the company's goods, it wasn't subject to the court's order suspending liquidation of various tire entries.

U.S. solar cell company Auxin Solar and solar module designer Concept Clean Energy argued on July 22 that Section 318(a) of the Trade Act of 1930 didn't permit the Commerce Department to pause antidumping and countervailing duties on solar cells and modules from four Southeast Asian countries found to be circumventing the AD/CVD orders on these products from China (Auxin Solar v. United States, CIT # 23-00274).

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 U.S. told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on July 19 that importer Nutricia North America's medical foods should be classified as "food preparations" and not "medicaments" (Nutricia North America v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 24-1436).

In a pair of opinions published July 22, Court of International Trade Judge Timothy Reif granted motions from defendant-intervenors (see 2305190068) and the International Trade Commission (see 2309010004) to dismiss two cases brought by Turkish steel exporter Eregli Demir ve Celik Fabrikalari regarding the same sunset review of an antidumping duty order on hot-rolled steel flat products from Turkey.

The U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision upending the Chevron principle of deferring to federal agencies' interpretations of ambiguous statutes requires a more demanding review of the Office of Foreign Assets Control's use of the Global Magnitsky Act and International Emergency Economic Powers Act, sanctioned Mir Rahman Rahmani and his son, Hafi Ajmal Rahmani, argued (Mir Rahman Rahmani v. Janet Yellen, D.D.C. # 24-00285).

Importers Yellow Bird and Vantage Point filed a complaint at the Court of International Trade July 18 arguing that a 1955 Jaguar race car, driven in competitions by multiple Australian racing drivers, is a collector's item, not a used motor vehicle (Yellowbird Enterprises v. U.S., CIT # 24-00121).

The Court of International Trade on July 18 sent back the Commerce Department's decision to include importer Elysium Tile's composite tile within the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on ceramic tile from China. Judge Jane Restani said the "complexity of Elysium's processes" shows that the company's tile underwent more than "minor processing," which would have kept the goods in the orders' scope.

Ildico, importer of luxury Richard Mille watches, told the Court of International Trade that the U.S. is seeking to "distract from the legal issue" in the case by claiming that Ildico allegedly can't prove the characteristics of the watches (Ildico v. United States, CIT # 18-00136).

The Court of International Trade properly rejected the Commerce Department's decision to set the separate rate respondents' antidumping duty margin by averaging a zero percent rate and an adverse facts available rate, exporter Zhejiang Dehua TB Import & Export Co. told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Filing a reply brief July 17, the exporter said Commerce failed to support its use of the averaged rates and that the agency ultimately arrived at the correct determination: a zero percent margin for the separate rate companies (Linyi Chengen Import and Export Co. v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 24-1258).