The three-judge panel in the Section 301 litigation before the U.S. Court of International Trade scheduled an April 26 status conference for 9:30 a.m. EDT, said an order signed Thursday. The conference is an apparent try to hammer out a compromise between plaintiffs and defendants over the disputed refund relief issue for importers seeking to have the Lists 3 and 4A tariffs vacated. Broad disagreement separates the HMTX-Jasco plaintiffs in the sample case from the government over whether importers who prevail on the merits of the massive litigation would be entitled to tariff refunds on customs entries whose liquidations are final, according to a joint status report filed April 12 with the court (see 2104130025). The impasse had HMTX-Jasco attorneys from Akin Gump warning they would move April 22 for a declaratory judgment that the court has the authority to order refunds of liquidated entries if the plaintiffs win. They alternatively threatened to seek a court injunction to suspend liquidations on all goods from China with Lists 3 and 4A tariff exposure until the litigation is resolved. Scheduling the status conference for four days after the Akin Gump deadline suggests those motions are now on hold, pending the outcome of the conference. Akin Gump and DOJ didn’t comment Friday.

Developing innovative environmental technologies, goods and services and “cultivating strategic international supply chains” for trade will be key to “climate mitigation,” U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai told a Center for American Progress event Thursday. “From clean energy, to low-emission vehicles and other technologies, reliable access to these goods and services will be essential for our transition to net zero by 2050,” she said. That’s why she said she's “so committed” to helping resolve the “big trade dispute” between LG and SK Innovation, two South Korean companies that make electric vehicle batteries in the U.S. The settlement she helped broker last weekend (see 2104120018) “was a big win for American workers, the environment and our competitive future,” said Tai. “We need a strong, diversified, and resilient supply chain of electric vehicle batteries in America to meet the growing global demand and to expand U.S. manufacturing of clean energy vehicles. This settlement puts the country in a stronger position to drive innovation and growth of clean energy technology.”

The briefing schedule in the massive Section 301 litigation inundating the U.S. Court of International Trade will end Nov. 15, said an order (in Pacer) signed Tuesday by the three-judge panel of Mark Barnett, Claire Kelly and Jennifer Choe-Groves. It was a small victory for Akin Gump lawyers representing sample case plaintiffs HMTX Industries and Jasco Products, who asked in their joint status report Monday for that deadline (see 2104130025). DOJ wanted a Dec. 23 deadline, saying it feared attorneys in the 3,700 stayed cases would file a large volume of amicus briefs that the government would need time to respond to. “The court does not anticipate extending these deadlines absent extraordinary circumstances, which may include an exceptionally large number of amicus briefs presenting distinct arguments,” said Tuesday’s order. The court will contact Akin Gump and DOJ about scheduling a status conference to discuss their disagreements over refunding importers for liquidated customs entries if they win the litigation. Akin Gump warned Monday it would seek declaratory judgment April 22 that the court has the authority to order refunds or would move for an injunction suspending liquidations until the litigation is resolved. All the complaints filed since September allege the List 3 and 4A tariffs on Chinese goods are unlawful because they violate the 1974 Trade Act and 1946 Administrative Procedure Act. The first date on the briefing schedule is for DOJ’s April 30 filing of an administrative record index in the case. That’s a summary of documents and materials in the government’s possession that helped inform its List 3 and 4A tariff decisions. Amicus briefs from the lawyers in the stayed cases are due Aug. 9, and DOJ’s responses are due Oct. 1.

China “firmly rejects” the Commerce Department’s addition of seven Chinese supercomputing entities to the Entity List on U.S. national security grounds (see 2104080006), said a Foreign Affairs Ministry spokesperson Friday. “Despite the long-existing U.S. technology blockade on China in supercomputing, China has become a frontrunner in this field with its independent innovation,” he said. “U.S. containment and suppression won’t be able to stop China’s scientific progress, but will only make China more determined in advancing independent innovation.” China will take “necessary countermeasures to resolutely safeguard Chinese companies’ legitimate rights and interests,” warned the spokesperson. Commerce didn’t comment.

Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo suggested her agency has no plans to remove Huawei from the Entity List and said Wednesday she will aggressively use trade tools to compete with China. But she also said she will prioritize efforts to invest in U.S. technology industries over imposing more export restrictions. “My broad view is what we do on offense is more important than what we do on defense,” Raimondo told reporters. “To compete in the long run with China, we need to rebuild America in all of the ways we're talking about.” She said U.S. offensive tools include investments in domestic semiconductor manufacturing. But defensive tools may be necessary to address China’s “uncompetitive, coercive and underhanded” actions, she said, and Commerce will continue to maintain restrictions against Huawei. “A lot of people have said, is Huawei going to stay on the Entity List?” she said. “I have no reason to believe that they won't.” Commerce added seven Chinese supercomputing entities to the Entity List early Thursday, allegedly for activities that are contrary to U.S. “national security or foreign policy interests.” They were: Tianjin Phytium Information Technology, Shanghai High-Performance IC Design Center, Sunway Microelectronics, and Chinese national supercomputing centers in Jinan, Shenzhen, Wuxi and Zhengzhou. “These entities are involved with building supercomputers used by China’s military actors,” said Commerce. The Chinese Foreign Affairs Ministry didn’t comment.

A Chinese Foreign Affairs Ministry spokesperson warned Wednesday that “the wheels will come off” for the U.S if it persists in alleging genocide and other atrocities in Xinjiang and uses the accusations as grounds for boycotting the 2022 Winter Olympics in Beijing. Allegations about human rights abuses in Xinjiang are “the most outrageous lie of the century,” he said, a day after State Department spokesperson Ned Price told reporters the U.S. would “review” its Olympics options in "close consultations with partners and allies" around the world. “Politicization of sports runs counter to the spirit of the Olympic charter and harms the interests of all athletes as well as the international Olympic cause,” said the ministry spokesperson of a possible U.S. boycott. “The international community, including the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee, will not buy it,” he said. “We have every confidence that with concerted efforts, we will host an extraordinary and outstanding Olympic event in Beijing in 2022.”

Judge Mark Barnett became chief judge of the U.S. Court of International Trade, after former Chief Judge Timothy Stanceu's move Monday to senior judge status, according to the court's website. Barnett joined the court in 2013 as a President Barack Obama appointee and was the court's longest-tenured judge after Stanceu's move. Barnett sits on the three-judge panel presiding over the court's massive Section 301 litigation, with Judges Claire Kelly and Jennifer Choe-Groves.

ViewSonic is the latest tech importer to join the massive Section 301 litigation seeking to get the U.S. Court of International Trade to declare the List 3 and 4A Chinese tariffs unlawful under the 1974 Trade Act and 1946 Administrative Procedure Act and get the paid duties refunded. ViewSonic also is among the growing list of complainants arguing the tariffs violate constitutional protections on federal revenue collection and the Fifth Amendment’s due process clause. The ViewSonic action is unusual for its use of four fallback claims of timeliness on the filing of Thursday's complaint (in Pacer), all tied to the two-year anniversaries of different Customs and Border Protection liquidation dates on PC monitor import entries. Court rules require plaintiffs to file their cases within two years after "the cause of action first accrues."

U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai met virtually with Vietnam Minister of Industry and Trade Tran Tuan Anh, highlighting the Biden administration’s “concerns” about Hanoi’s “currency practices covered in the ongoing Section 301 investigation,” said her agency Thursday. She and Anh committed to meeting later this year “to assess progress made in strengthening the trade relationship and in resolving outstanding bilateral issues,” it said. It was the first apparent signal that President Joe Biden's administration intends to keep U.S. allegations of Vietnam’s currency manipulation actively on the table. Tai’s predecessor, Robert Lighthizer, opted not to impose remedial tariffs on Vietnam imports in the remaining days of the Donald Trump administration for Hanoi’s allegedly improper devaluation of the dong against the dollar, but he did find Vietnam’s practices “actionable” under Section 301, leaving it up to the next administration to “continue to evaluate all available options” (see 2101150052). Vietnam generated 19% of all smartphone imports to the U.S. in 2020, plus 5% of laptops and tablets and 24% of TVs under 35 inches, which were in especially high demand last year during the pandemic.

U.S. “accusations and slanders” against Made in China 2025, Beijing's long-term industrial policy, are “groundless,” said a Chinese Foreign Affairs Ministry spokesperson Thursday. An Office of the U.S. Trade Representative report on foreign trade barriers said Wednesday many of the policy tools China uses to achieve the goals of Made in China 2025 “raise serious concerns” by restricting or “otherwise creating disadvantages for foreign enterprises.” The ministry spokesperson responded that Made in China 2025 “goals and measures are open and transparent.” The strategy’s “relevant policies and measures are applicable to all companies operating in China, with foreign and domestic companies treated as equals,” she said.