Anti-forced labor advocacy group International Rights Advocates (IRAdvocates) will appeal a Court of International Trade decision finding it didn't have standing to challenge CBP's inaction in responding to a petition to ban cocoa from Cote d'Ivoire. The trade court said IRAdvocates failed to show that the agency's inaction harmed a "core business or diminished any asset" -- a standard estsablished by the Supreme Court (see 2408080049). Counsel for IRAdvocates said if its claim for standing fails on appeal, it's prepared to refile the case using a party that could hurdle the trade court's understanding of standing, such as a child laborer in West Africa or a U.S. chocolate company that competes with imports made using child labor (see 2408160009) (International Rights Advocates v. Alejandro Mayorkas, CIT # 23-00165).

In defense of its motion for summary judgment and opposition to the government’s, an airplane parts importer said Aug. 30 that Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 8803, which covers “parts of goods” for aircraft or nonpowered aircraft, is more specific than heading 6307, which represents “other made up articles, including dress patterns” in a fabric section (Honeywell International Inc. v. U.S., CIT # 17-00256).

In a Sept. 4 motion for judgment, an Italian pasta exporter whose countervailing duty rate jumped from under 2% to 88.67% due to the application of adverse facts available again argued that, based on the Eighth Amendment, AFA must still be assessed accurately and not be calculated to destroy a company entirely (see 2402290018) (Pastificio Gentile S.r.l. v. U.S., CIT # 24-00037).

The Court of International Trade on Sept. 9 rejected importer Katana Racing's renewed motion to dismiss the govenrment's action against it seeking over $5.7 million in unpaid duties on passenger vehicle and light truck tires from China, after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the trade court's previous dismissal of the case. In her first opinion since being confirmed to the court, Judge Lisa Wang said the U.S. didn't fail to properly identify the "person" liable for the violation, exhaust administrative remedies or bring the case on time (U.S. v. Katana Racing, CIT # 19-00125).

Importer Woodcraft Supply filed a complaint on Sept. 6 at the Court of International Trade seeking refunds on duties overpaid due to CBP's refusal to use "first sale" valuation on the company's woodworking tools and related article imports (Woodcraft Supply v. United States, CIT # 22-00253).

Importer Solid State Logic voluntarily dismissed its customs suit on its audio production consoles, filing a notice of dismissal on Sept. 5 at the Court of International Trade. The company brought the suit to claim that the entered value of its consoles was overstated. Counsel for Solid State didn't respond to request for comment as to why the case was dismissed (Solid State Logic v. United States, CIT # 22-00310).

Pistol maker Glock partially opposed a U.S. attempt to amend a scheduling order in a contentious case (see 2408130064) regarding CBP’s failure to deduct royalties from its valuation of a single entry of imported pistol kits. The importer said it agreed to a 60-day extension, but complained that the government “has repeatedly sought and obtained extensions of time to respond to all matters involving deadlines set by this Court’s rules, beginning with the time to file its Answer” (Glock v. U.S., CIT # 23-00046).

The Court of International Trade on Sept. 9 rejected importer Katana Racing's renewed motion to dismiss the government's action against it to recover unpaid duties on passenger vehicle and light truck tires from China. In her first opinion since being confirmed to the court, Judge Lisa Wang held that the U.S. didn't fail to properly identify the person liable for the violation, didn't need to exhaust administrative remedies and didn't unreasonably delay in bringing the claim. The judge added that Katana's claim of government misconduct is better characterized as part of summary judgment. Wang also denied both the government's and Katana's motions for summary judgment, finding there to be genuine issues of material fact that can't be sorted on the current motions, particularly due to the lack of undisputed facts in the case.

The Commerce Department stuck by its treatment of antidumping duty respondent Assan Aluminyum's raw material costs and hedging revenues on remand at the Court of International Trade in the AD investigation on aluminum foil from Turkey. However, the agency modified Assan's duty drawback adjustment, resulting in a slight uptick in the respondent's AD rate, from 2.28% to 2.3% (Assan Aluminyum Sanayi ve Tiaret v. United States, CIT # 21-00616).

The United Steelworkers labor union brought a case to the Court of International Trade on Sep. 4 arguing that a Commerce Department scope ruling, which excluded a certain type of temporary tire from antidumping duties on passenger vehicle and light truck tires from Taiwan, had misunderstood the language of the AD order it had drawn from (United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union, AFL-CIO, CLC v. U.S., CIT # 24-00165).