The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on July 9 granted a joint stipulation of dismissal from the U.S. and exporters led by Risen Energy Co. on the 2017 review of the countervailing duty order on solar cells from China. The government appealed the Court of International Trade decision siding with Risen on the agency's land benchmark calculation and use of adverse facts available pertaining to China's Export Buyer's Credit Program (see 2312200026). Gregory Menegaz, counsel for Risen, said that the U.S. sought the dismissal, suggesting it was due to the "bad facts" for the U.S. in the review (Risen Energy Co. v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 20-03912).
Court of Federal Appeals Trade activity
The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on July 9 dismissed the remaining claims U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Judge Pauline Newman brought against three of her colleagues for their investigation into her fitness to continue serving on the bench (Hon. Pauline Newman v. Hon. Kimberly Moore, D.D.C. # 23-01334).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit will sit at law schools and courthouses in the San Francisco area as part of its October session.
The Solar Energy Industries Association told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that the Supreme Court's recent decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo scrapping the doctrine of Chevron deference to federal agencies should compel the appellate court to overturn the deferential standard established in Maple Leaf Fish Co. v. United States (see 2406280051) (Solar Energy Industries Association v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 22-1392).
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. and exporters led by Risen Energy Co. agreed July 8 to dismiss a case on the 2017 review of the countervailing duty order on solar cells from China (Risen Energy Co. v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 24-1524). The government appealed the Court of International Trade decision siding with Risen on the agency's land benchmark calculation and use of adverse facts available pertaining to China's Export Buyer's Credit Program (see 2312200026) (Risen Energy Co. v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 20-03912).
The U.S. told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit July 8 that its decision not to appear in an antidumping and countervailing duty scope case "has no effect on the Court's standard of review." Filing a supplemental brief as an amicus at the invitation of the court, the government said its decision not to join the appeal "merely reflects its reasoned consideration not to pursue the appellate process" (Worldwide Door Components v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-1532) (Columbia Aluminum Products v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-1534).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said that it will "proceed as scheduled" amid "extensive street closures and traffic restrictions near the National Courts Building" the week of July 8. Access to the courthouse will be available from only H Street NW, the court said, encouraging counsel to budget additional travel time. Numerous Washington streets are seeing closures and/or restrictions this week due to the NATO Summit in the city.
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.
Litigants in a pair of cases at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit jumped on the U.S. Supreme Court's move last week to axe the principle of agency deference when interpreting ambiguous statutes (see 2406280051). In notices of supplemental authority, two importers told the appellate court that the Court of International Trade relied on the now-defunct Chevron deference standard.