The U.S. will appeal a recent Court of International Trade decision vacating the Commerce Department's decision not to collect antidumping and countervailing duties on solar cells from Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam (Auxin Solar v. United States, CIT # 23-00274).

More domestic producers in an Ecuadorian shrimp case objected Oct. 10 to exporters’ motion to supplement the judicial record. They also brought a challenge to the exporters’ further request for more briefing on the issue (Industrial Pesquera Santa Priscila v. United States, CIT Consol. # 25-00025).

The New Zealand government on Oct. 16 opposed conservation group Maui and Hector's Dolphin Defenders NZ's motion for the Court of International Trade to reconsider its decision not to immediately impose an import ban on seafood and seafood products from set net and trawl fisheries off New Zealand's North Island. Reconsideration motions under CIT Rule 59(e), like the conservation group's, can only be applied to judgments, and the trade court hasn't issued a judgment here, merely a remand, the New Zealand government argued (Maui and Hector's Dolphin Defenders NZ v. National Marine Fisheries Service, CIT # 24-00218).

Correction: In two complaints filed Oct. 10, petitioner The American Personal Transportation Vehicle Manufacturers Coalition challenged the antidumping duty investigation on Chinese-origin golf carts, saying the Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission should both have found critical circumstances with regard to an exporter (The American Personal Transportation Vehicle Manufacturers Coalition v. United States, CIT # 25-00203, 25-00204).

The following lawsuits were filed recently at the Court of International Trade:

Agreeing that the International Trade Commission isn’t required to determine that imports “surged” prior to the publication of antidumping or countervailing duty orders to find critical circumstances, a domestic pea protein producer supported Oct. 8 the ITC’s own explanation of the relevant standard (see 2509290056) (NURA USA v. United States, CIT Consol. # 24-00182).

Exporter Kangdi Electric Vehicle (Hainan) and its affiliated importer Kandi America filed a pair of complaints at the Court of International Trade on Oct. 14 to contest the International Trade Commission's and Commerce Department's affirmative finding of critical circumstances regarding Chinese low speed personal transportation vehicles from China (Kangdi Electric Vehicle (Hainan) v. United States, CIT #'s 25-00201, -00202).

The other mandatory respondent in the Commerce Department’s antidumping duty and countervailing duty investigations on Chinese-origin golf carts, Xiamen Dalle, challenged the critical circumstances finding Commerce reached regarding it in the CVD investigation in an Oct. 14 complaint. It said its prior attorney had failed to submit certain data, then tried to cover up their mistake (Xiamen Dalle New Energy Automobile Co. v. United States, CIT # 25-00205).

Trade Law Daily is providing readers with the top stories from last week, in case you missed them. All articles can be found by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.

Importer BASF Corporation will appeal a recent Court of International Trade decision regarding the proper tariff classification of BASF's food additive Betatene. In an August ruling, the trade court said the importer's product was properly classified under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 2106 as a dietary supplement (see 2509050057). CIT Judge Lisa Wang said that the products weren’t general-use “provitamins,” as BASF argued, because the preparation they underwent for tableting made them not suitable for general commercial use. BASF will take the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (BASF Corporation v. United States, CIt # 12-00422).