The International Trade Commission can't rely on the Commerce Department's findings regarding the post-petition increase in subject imports for the purpose of making a critical circumstances determination, importer Nura USA argued in a Dec. 23 motion for judgment at the Court of International Trade (Nura USA v. United States, CIT Consol. # 24-00182).
The Commerce Department properly found that exporter Universal Quartz was ineligible to participate in the agency's certification process for verifying that quartz surface products from Malaysia weren't subject to the antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders on the same goods from China, the U.S. argued. Filing a reply to importer AM Stone & Cabinets' motion for judgment at the Court of International Trade, the government also said that despite AM Stone's claim that Commerce impermissibly used adverse facts available, the agency didn't apply AFA (AM Stone & Cabinets v. United States, CIT # 24-00241).
The Commerce Department didn't reasonably support its decision to remove respondent PT. Zinus Global Indonesia's in-transit mattresses from its quarterly ratio calculations, since it relied on a "demonstrably inaccurate 'fact' to justify its decision," petitioners, led by Brooklyn Bedding, argued (PT. Zinus Global Indonesia v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 25-1674).
Importer Cyber Power Systems erred in analyzing whether its cables fit under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 8544.42.90, which provides for cables "of a kind used for telecommunications," by only looking to the "device and industry in which" its cables are used, the U.S. argued (Cyber Power Systems (USA) v. United States, CIT # 21-00200).
Importer G&H Diversified Manufacturing on Dec. 19 asked the Court of International Trade for a ruling on a pair of deposition notices directed at CBP and the Bureau of Industry and Security in its lawsuit seeking a Section 232 duty exclusion for its steel tube imports (G&H Diversified Manufacturing v. United States, CIT # 22-00130).
Importer Transvolt took to the Court of International Trade to argue that CBP unlawfully excluded its golf carts from entry based either on the notion that the golf carts fail to meet Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards or that the carts were transshipped through Vietnam. Transvolt filed a complaint on Dec. 22 in one of multiple cases the importer brought to contest the exclusion of multiple of its entries (Transvolt v. United States, CIT # 25-00582).
CBP unlawfully initiated an antidumping duty and countervailing duty evasion investigation more than 15 days after receiving an allegation of duty evasion and imposed interim measures in violation of importer Sinoboom North America's due process rights, Sinoboom argued in a Dec. 22 complaint at the Court of International Trade (Sinoboom North America v. United States, CIT # 25-00876).
The following lawsuits were filed recently at the Court of International Trade:
The U.S. agreed to grant a drawback claim for an entry of a luxury Porsche 911 Turbo S vehicle, according to a stipulated judgment filed on Dec. 22 at the Court of International Trade (Timothy Brown v. United States, CIT # 20-03733).
Importer Hardware Resources alerted the Court of International Trade to a recent scope ruling by the Commerce Department on feedstock for window blinds, arguing that it helps its case contesting Commerce's scope ruling on wood mouldings and millwork products (Hardware Resources v. United States, CIT # 23-00150).