The Court of International Trade on Oct. 7 denied importer Interglobal Forest's application for attorney's fees in a case that saw CBP reverse its finding that various importers, including Interglobal, evaded the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on hardwood plywood from China. Judge Mark Barnett said Interglobal wasn't the "prevailing party" in the case because CBP reversed its evasion finding after the Commerce Department altered its scope determination following a separate case at CIT. The judge added that because CBP is mandated to rely on other agencies' determinations, the agency's position was "substantially justified."

The U.S. and importer Roper Corp. settled a customs spat on the company's microwave ovens, with CBP agreeing to liquidate the goods without Section 301 duties (Roper Corp. v. United States, CIT # 22-00217).

Two 2021 cases arguing importers' products should have been excluded from Section 301 duties were dismissed by their Houston-based law firm Oct. 1 (Anatolia Tile & Stone, Inc. v. U.S., CIT # 21-00245; Bray International v. U.S., CIT # 21-00332).

Importers led by Tenaris Bay City sent comments to the Court of International Trade last week opposing the International Trade Commission's separate decisions to cumulate both Russian and South Korean oil country tubular goods with goods from Argentina and Mexico. Tenaris Bay argued that the ITC improperly interpreted the statute in defining the phrase "compete with," which "uses the present tense and thus denotes" that the goods in question must compete with the like product during the "months leading up to and including vote day" (Tenaris Bay City v. United States, CIT Consol. # 22-00344).

Court of International Trade Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves ruled Oct. 4 that the government hadn’t sufficiently responded to discovery requests by pistolmaker Glock, overruling a number of DOJ's objections and criticizing it for missing its interrogatory responses deadline.

The Court of International Trade on Oct. 4 remanded the Commerce Department's decision to include certain products from exporter Tecnicas de Fluidos (TEFLU) within the scope of the antidumping duty order on light-walled rectangular pipe and tube from Mexico in the 2020-21 review of the order. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves said Commerce must answer whether TEFLU's "further manufactured products" are "downstream products" outside the order's scope. The agency must lay out "the degree to which" the exporter's goods were processed by various methods and whether each good was further processed, instead of basing its determination "solely on the physical and chemical composition" of the products. Choe-Groves added that Commerce must assess whether TEFLU's goods are within an industry investigated by the International Trade Commission in its corresponding injury analysis.

There have been no lawsuits recently filed at the Court of International Trade.

The United States said Sept. 30 that an Indian aluminum exporter was trying to “artificially separate two similar industries” in its attempt to avoid being assessed a countervailing duty for the provision of coal for less-than-adequate remuneration (Hindalco Industries Limited v. U.S., CIT # 23-00260).

The U.S. agreed to liquidate some of importer LE Commodities' steel tube entries without Section 232 duties and refund any duties paid, per the terms of a settlement reached by the parties in the importer's case against its denied requests for Section 232 exclusions (LE Commodities v. United States, CIT # 22-00245).

The Court of International Trade on Oct. 2 sustained the Commerce Department's scope ruling made on remand excluding engines with horizontal crankshafts from the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on vertical shaft engines between 99cc and up to 225cc from China.