The Court of International Trade erred when it failed to find that importer BASF's food additive betatene is classified as a natural or synthetically reproduced provitamin under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 2936, BASF argued in its opening brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The importer said that it clearly established that its product was "prima facie classifiable under heading 2936, meaning that as a matter of law, classification under heading 2106," as a dietary supplement, "cannot stand" (BASF Corporation v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 26-1056).
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.
The Court of International Trade erred in holding that the rule established in the USMCA requiring parties seeking CIT review of antidumping duty and countervailing duty proceedings to provide proper notice is a jurisdictional rule, exporter Pipe & Piling Supplies told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in its Jan. 13 opening brief (Pipe & Piling Supplies v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 26-1155).
The Court of International Trade on Jan. 14 confirmed that the government's stipulation regarding the availability of refunds from tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act "applies to all current and future similarly situated plaintiffs."
International trade firm Grunfeld Desiderio has promoted Kristina Barry to partner, the firm announced. Barry joined the firm in 2018 as an associate after graduating from Brooklyn Law School and serving as a law clerk at the Court of International Trade.
The following lawsuits were filed recently at the Court of International Trade:
The U.S. on Jan. 12 opposed a group of importers' bid to add two claims to their case challenging CBP's initiation of an Enforce and Protect Act duty evasion investigation as "untimely" and the interim measures imposed as a violation of the importers' due process rights (Centric Pipe v. United States, CIT Consol. # 25-00182).
In a Jan. 12 reply brief supporting a motion for judgment, importer AM Stone again argued it provided enough information to the Commerce Department for it to make certain calculations in its antidumping duty and countervailing duty reviews of quartz surface products from Malaysia without resorting to facts otherwise available (AM Stone & Cabinets v. United States, CIT # 24-00241).