The following lawsuits were filed recently at the Court of International Trade:

The Commerce Department properly found that Export Packers Company's individually quick frozen cooked garlic cloves are outside the scope of the antidumping duty order on fresh garlic from China, Export Packers argued in a Jan. 16 brief at the Court of International Trade. The exporter argued that, contrary to petitioner Fresh Garlic Producers Association's claims, the plain language of the scope excludes Export Packers' cooked garlic and other sources, including a separate scope ruling on blanched garlic and Commerce's preliminary determination, don't support the petitioner's arguments (Export Packers Company v. United States, CIT # 24-00061).

The following lawsuits were filed recently at the Court of International Trade:

Importer PF America dropped another of its cases seeking an exclusion from Section 301 China tariffs for its vinyl tile flooring entries on Jan. 14 at the Court of International Trade. Recently, the importer voluntarily dismissed two other cases it brought seeking similar exclusions (see 2509300016). PF America entered the goods under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheadings 3916.20.0020 and 9903.88.17, though CBP classified the goods under subheadings 3916.20.0091 and 9903.88.02, subjecting the flooring to Section 301 duties (PF America v. United States, CIT # 22-00020).

In remand comments, exporter POSCO continued to challenge the Commerce Department’s decision to find that South Korea’s emissions cap-and-trade program provided it a financial benefit, saying the program’s emissions permits were “restriction[s],” not benefits (POSCO v. United States, CIT # 24-00006).

A 1985 Ferrari 288 GTO is properly classified under duty-free Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 9705.10.0090 as a "collectors' piece of historical interest," rather than as a motor vehicle of subheading 8703.23.0190, dutiable at 2.5%, importer Ferrari 288 GTO LLC argued in a Jan. 14 complaint at the Court of International Trade (Ferrari 288 GTO LLC v. United States, CIT # 26-00671).

The Commerce Department on Jan. 15 explained more about its finding that exporter Hoa Phat Pipe isn't eligible to certify whether its light-walled rectangular pipe and tube was made using hot-rolled steel from China. After a remand order from the Court of International Trade, Hoa Phat confirmed that it was "unable to track the source of" its hot-rolled steel inputs prior to the inquiry period in the antidumping duty and countervailing duty circumvention proceeding at issue and has no basis to certify the country of origin of its pipe consistent with the agency's practice, Commerce said (Hoa Phat Steel Pipe v. United States, CIT Consol. # 23-00248).

The following lawsuits were filed recently at the Court of International Trade:

In a motion for judgment filed Jan. 14, petitioners said the Commerce Department was wrong to use exporter OM Materials’ revised information on verification in its antidumping duty investigation on ferrosilicon from Malaysia (CC Metals and Alloys v. United States, CIT # 25-00131).

The Court of International Trade on Jan. 14 denied Miller & Chevalier's motion for a limited lifting of the stay imposed by the trade court in a handful of new cases seeking refunds of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.