German paper exporters Koehler Oberkirch and Koehler Paper on May 13 opposed the government's bid to serve the companies' U.S.-based counsel in a separate case, claiming that the rules don't "permit such service." The exporters said service instead should be effectuated through diplomatic channels, as contemplated by the rules, as this would "respect international comity and due process principles" (U.S. v. Koehler Oberkirch GmbH, CIT # 24-00014).
The International Trade Commission did not properly investigate the actual feasibility or frequency of reshipping excess phosphate fertilizer during a year in which fertilizer supply chains were rocked by unusual events, foreign exporters and domestic importers told the Court of International Trade May 8 in comments opposing a continued affirmative injury finding by the ITC after a remand (OCP v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 21-00219).
The U.S. told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that the principle of stare decisis requires the appellate court to sustain the legality of the Commerce Department's non-market economy policy (Jilin Forest Industry Jinqiao Flooring Group Co. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-2245).
Tire exporters YC Rubber Co. and Sutong Tire Resources alerted the Court of International Trade to a separate CIT decision affirming the Commerce Department's finding that the mandatory respondent in an antidumping duty review remained eligible for a separate rate "despite its unwilligness to participate in the administrative review" (YC Rubber Co. (North America) v. United States, CIT # 19-00069).
The U.S. on May 13 moved to dismiss a lawsuit challenging CBP's exclusion of two rubber tire entries, claiming that CIT has no jurisdiction because the entries were excluded at the behest of the Transportation Department's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). As a result, the exclusions were not protestable decisions made by CBP, so the Court of International Trade had no subject matter jurisdiction under Section 1581(a) (Inspired Ventures v. United States, CIT # 24-00062).
Conservation groups Sea Shepherd New Zealand and Sea Shepherd Conservation Society asked the Court of International Trade on May 10 for another 30 days to settle the final issues in a case ultimately seeking an import ban on certain types of fish from New Zealand. The conservation groups said they sent the U.S. an offer to settle the matter of the groups' "claim for fees and costs in this case," and that DOJ is reviewing the offer under the agency's regulations (Sea Shepherd New Zealand v. United States, CIT # 20-00112).
The Court of International Trade on May 13 entered default judgment against Chinese exporter Cherish Your Health Food Inc. in a customs penalty case. The U.S. brought the suit in October 2023 claiming that the company hadn't paid antidumping duties on five fresh garlic entries imported in 2018-20 (United States v. Cherish Your Health Food, CIT # 23-00230).
The U.S. on May 10 told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that the Court of International Trade "improperly relied on extra-record information" in rejecting the Commerce Department's final determination in the antidumping duty investigation on hardwood plywood from China (Linyi Chengen Import and Export Co. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 24-1258).
DOJ accidentally included confidential business and personal information for unrelated cases in an October filing due to a glitch in CBP's Automated Commercial Environment (ACE), the agency said May 10 in a letter to the Court of International Trade (Suprajit Controls v. U.S., CIT # 23-00181).
The Court of International Trade on May 9 allowed a case to proceed against the Commerce Department's pause of antidumping and countervailing duties on Southeast Asian solar panels, rejecting motions to dismiss from the government and nine solar cell importers and exporters.