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. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Nov. 19 dismissed Nebraska man Byungmin Chae's second case challenging the results of his April 2018 customs broker license exam. Chae previously litigated the results of the exam in an earlier case before the Court of International Trade and CAFC, ultimately coming just one correctly answered question shy of a passing grade. After the Supreme Court declined to take up his first case, Chae filed another lawsuit to challenge one question on the test. The Federal Circuit dismissed the second lawsuit, finding that Chae should have brought any additional claims against the question in his first case.
DOJ trial attorney Kyle Beckrich has left the agency, he announced on LinkedIn. Beckrich worked at DOJ for over six years, often arguing trade cases before the Court of International Trade and U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Beckrich, who was based in Washington, D.C., said he's returning to Texas to enter private practice.
The Court of International Trade on Nov. 14 extended the deadline for interested parties to submit comments on proposed amendments to one of the court's practice rules. Comments that had been due by Nov. 24 now will be accepted through close of business on Dec. 5.
The following lawsuits were filed recently at the Court of International Trade:
Two importers, SAM HPRP Chemicals, dba SAM Nutrition, and Zak Designs, filed identical complaints at the trade court Nov. 14 challenging President Donald Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose global tariffs (Zak Designs v. U.S. Customs and Border Protection, CIT # 25-00266) (SAM HPRP Chemicals Inc. v. U.S. Customs and Border Protection, CIT # 25-00267).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Nov. 17 issued its mandate in a countervailing duty case on the application of the Commerce Department's cross-ownership regulation to respondent Gujarat Fluorochemicals in the CVD investigation on polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) resin from India (see 2510080027). Last month, the court said the regulation turns on whether the purpose of the subsidy provided to a cross-owned input provider "is to benefit the production of both the input and downstream products." The court said the Court of International Trade was right to reject Commerce's application of this regulation to Gujarat (Gujarat Fluorochemicals v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 24-1268).
The Commerce Department reasonably decided not to attribute subsidies provided to Nur Gemicilik, an affiliated input supplier of countervailing duty respondent Kaptan Demir, to Kaptan itself in the 2018 CVD review on Turkish rebar, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held on Nov. 17. Judges Raymond Chen, Richard Linn and Todd Hughes said Commerce properly identified that the unprocessed steel scrap Nur provided Kaptan was a "common input" and that the agency didn't place undue weight on consideration of Nur's main business activity.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Nov. 17 held that five types of medical foods imported by Nutricia North America are properly classified as "medicaments" and not as "food preparations." Judges Sharon Prost, Richard Taranto and Leonard Stark overruled the Court of International Trade's decision, which came to the opposite conclusion, finding that Nutricia's products are properly found to be medicaments under duty-free Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 3004.50.5040.
The U.S. and an importer of tapered roller bearings said in a Nov. 14 status report that they have reached a settlement agreement. The government brought its case against the importer seeking $97 million for unpaid antidumping duties (United States v. Wanxiang America Corp., CIT # 22-00205).