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.
Court of Federal Appeals Trade activity
The U.S. asked for a voluntary remand at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in an Enforce and Protect Act case to discuss the legal effects of the Royal Brush Manufacturing v. U.S. decision. In Royal Brush, the appellate court said CBP violated an EAPA respondent's due process rights by not granting it access to the business confidential information in the proceeding (see 2307270038). Importer Skyview Cabinet USA consented to the motion, while the petitioner, MasterBrand Cabinets, took no position (Skyview Cabinet USA v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-2318).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in an Oct. 26 order granted a two-week extension for exporter Tau-Ken Temir and Kazakhstan's Ministry of Trade and Integration to file their reply brief in a case on the countervailing duty investigation on silicon metal from Kazakhstan. TKT and the trade ministry recently also asked the court for an additional 7,000 words in the reply brief, prompting the court to stay briefing until it can resolve the motion for the expanded word count (Tau-Ken Temir v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 22-2204).
The U.S. asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit for approval to use 3,000 more words in its reply brief in a case on the use of the Cohen's d test to root out "masked" dumping. The government said each of the three issues raised in the case is "complex and technical in nature." It said they cover two accounting issues and the intricacies of a statistical method, creating "good cause" for the additional words (Marmen v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-1877).
A finding of evasion against Skyview Cabinet USA was arbitrary and capricious because CBP failed to establish that the subject wooden cabinets and vanities were covered merchandise at the time they were made and because CBP failed to follow Enforce and Protect Act procedures when it applied adverse inferences, Skyview said in its Oct. 23 opening brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Skyview Cabinet USA v. U.S., Masterbrand Cabinets Inc., Fed. Cir. # 23-2318).
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. District Court for the District of Columbia granted U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Judges Kimberly Moore, Sharon Prost and Richard Taranto's motion for the establishment of a dispute resolution process in Judge Pauline Newman's suit against the three judges' fitness investigation on the 96-year-old judge. The D.C. court said in the text-only order that the parties are to contact Chief Circuit Mediator Robert Frost for further directions on establishing the dispute resolution procedure (The Hon. Pauline Newman v. The Hon. Kimberly A. Moore, D.D.C. # 23-01334).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in an Oct. 20 order granted the U.S. request for 55 more days to file its reply brief in the massive Section 301 litigation, despite an objection from the plaintiff-appellants, led by HMTX Industries. The government's reply brief is now due Dec. 21 following the extension, which was the second of its kind following a 60-day extension (HMTX Industries v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1891).
The Commerce Department legally found that the Korean government didn't provide a countervailable benefit through its provision of electricity to respondents in the countervailing duty investigation on carbon and alloy steel cut-to-length plate from South Korea, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled Oct. 23. Judges Raymond Chen, Todd Hughes and Tiffany Cunningham said Commerce sufficiently carried out a less-than-adequate-remuneration (LTAR) analysis after its original preferential rate analysis fell short before the appellate court in 2019.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in an Oct. 23 opinion sustained the Commerce Department's decision not to countervail the South Korean government's provision of electricity as part of the countervailing duty investigation into carbon and alloy steel cut-to-length plate from South Korea. Judges Raymond Chen, Todd Hughes and Tiffany Cunningham said that, after the appellate court's previous rejection of Commerce's preferential rate analysis, the agency appropriately used a less than adequate remuneration analysis. Commerce also sufficiently investigated the Korean Power Exchange's generation costs and found no countervailable benefit, the court said.