A law firm said May 23 that the U.S. was failing to provide documents requested under the Freedom of Information Act partly because it was relying on a “novelly broad” interpretation of the Export Control Reform Act of 2018 (Husch Blackwell v. Department of Commerce, D.D.C. # 1:24-02733).
Thea Kendler, former assistant secretary for export administration at the Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security, and Aiysha Hussain, Kendler's senior policy adviser, have joined Mayer Brown as partners in the international trade, national security and white-collar defense practices, the firm announced. Kendler served at BIS for three years, joining the agency from DOJ, where she worked as a trial attorney in the national security division. Hussain worked at Commerce since 2020, serving as senior counsel then senior policy adviser for export administration.
Responding to a Court of International Trade request to discuss “the statutory scheme of who is eligible to apply for a separate rate,” wood moldings and millwork products exporters China Cornici and RaoPing said applicants shouldn’t need a suspended entry during the relevant review period (China Cornici Co. Ltd. v. U.S., CIT #s 23-000216, -00217).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit on March 17 affirmed the dismissal of steel importer JSW Steel (USA)'s suit against three U.S. steel makers, which alleged that the companies illegally conspired to "boycott JSW by refusing to supply it with specific, domestically produced steel slab" (JSW Steel (USA) Inc. v. Nucor Corp., 5th Cir. # 22-20149).
A State Department notice declaring that all agency efforts to control international trade now constitute a "foreign affairs function" of the U.S. under the Administrative Procedure Act will ultimately be subject to the discretion of the courts, trade lawyers told us.
Two Chinese exporters of chlorinated isocyanurates said March 7 that the Commerce Department was right to not hit them with an adverse inference when they couldn’t locate information for a review (Bio-Lab, Inc. v. United States, CIT # 24-00118).
President Donald Trump will likely turn to Section 301 to enact his plans for "reciprocal" tariffs, various trade lawyers told Trade Law Daily. Following the president's announcement of his reciprocal tariff plan, which will purportedly tackle "non-reciprocal trading arrangements" with many of the U.S.'s trading partners starting April 2, speculation ensued as to the precise scope of the tariffs and their legal bases.
A North Carolina business owner pleaded guilty last week after trying to export accelerometer technology with military uses to China without a Bureau of Industry and Security license, DOJ said. David Bohmerwald, owner of the electronics resale business Components Cooper Inc., faces a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison
The Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) improperly rejected 63 Section 232 steel tariff exclusion requests filed by California-based importer Mirror Metals, the company argued in a Dec. 20 complaint at the Court of International Trade. Mirror Metals said that if BIS applied the standards laid out in its regulations, the "only reasonable conclusion" it could have drawn was that the company "cannot obtain the subject steel in the U.S. market in a sufficient quantity or quality, on a timely basis to replace the steel it currently imports" (Mirror Metals v. United States, CIT # 24-00260).
The Court of International Trade on Dec. 19 declined to grant victory to G&H Diversified Manufacturing on the importer's claims that CBP previously, as part of its role in granting a Section 232 duty exclusion, already said the company's imports were subject to the exclusion. Judge Timothy Reif said open questions of fact still exist with regard to the extent of CBP's role in the exclusion process.