Importer Acquisition 362, d/b/a Strategic Import Supply (SIS), filed a petition for writ of certiorari at the U.S. Supreme Court of a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit opinion requiring protests to be filed within 180 days of liquidation and not the date the Commerce Department issues antidumping and countervailing duty instructions to CBP. SIS said that by establishing this requirement, the appellate court eliminated one statutory mechanism under which importers can file protests and encourages "premature, incomplete, sham protest filings" (Acquisition 362 v. U.S., U.S. # 22-1102).

The Commerce Department legally found that exporter Double Coin Holdings failed to rebut the presumption of government control when it levied a 105.31% China-wide rate in the fifth administrative review of the antidumping duty order on off-the-road tires from China, the Court of International Trade ruled. Judge Timothy Stanceu said that absent a statute or regulation governing the presumption of government control in AD cases, "the court lacks a basis to conclude that Commerce acted contrary to law in exercising its broad discretion" by centering its analysis on how Double Coin's government-owned majority shareholder influences the selection and supervision of management.

The Court of International Trade ruled that exporter Eregli Demir ve Celik Fabrikalari (Erdemir) failed to show that the court should revisit its past order allowing four U.S. steel companies to intervene in a case on the International Trade Commission's injury determination related to imports of hot-rolled steel from Turkey. Judge Timothy Reif said the four companies champion claims that share a common question of law or fact with the case's main action, would be adversely affected if the court were to rule in Erdemir's favor and would not unduly delay the adjudication of the original parties' rights.

The Court of International Trade should deny exporter Pirelli Tyre Co.'s motion to alter or amend the court's judgment so that the court may interpret Italian law since Pirelli cannot show that there were errors or irregularities in the ruling, the U.S. claimed in a reply brief. The government added that even if the trade court were to consider the evidence Pirelli is looking to add to the record, the motion fails "because it is not the role of this Court to make factual determinations with regard to foreign law in Commerce’s stead" (Pirelli Tyre Co. v. United States, CIT # 20-00115).

Plaintiffs in the massive Section 301 litigation officially filed on May 12 their notice of appeal of the Court of International Trade's decision upholding President Donald Trump's tariff action on China. The case was filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. CIT had agreed that the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative complied with Administrative Procedure Act requirements when it set lists 3 and 4A Section 301 tariffs (see 2303170063) (In Re Section 301 Cases, CIT # 21-00052).

The Court of International Trade canceled an oral argument that had been set for June 6 in an antidumping duty case that revolves around the Commerce Department's decision not to treat Indonesia as being at the same level of economic development as Vietnam during the surrogate country selection process in an AD administrative review on frozen fish fillets from Vietnam. The Catfish Farmers of America also argued against a byproduct offset granted for respondent NTSF Seafoods Joint Stock Co. Judge M. Miller Baker instead ordered the parties to file supplemental briefs addressing the evidence cited in the briefing related to the byproduct offset issue. Baker said "the meaning and significance of that evidence is unclear to the court." The briefs may not exceed 2,500 words and must be filed within 21 days (Catfish Farmers of America v. U.S., CIT # 20-00105).

The U.S. reply in a scope case on Vandewater International's steel branch outlets fails to follow either scope principle established by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's key precedential opinion in Arcelormittal Stainless Belg. v. U.S., appellant Sigma Corp. told the appellate court in a reply brief. In violation of Arcelormittal, the government interpreted the antidumping duty order on butt-weld pipe fittings from China in a vacuum devoid of any consideration of the way the order's language is used in the relevant industry and identified ambiguity where none exists, Sigma argued (Vandewater International v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1093).

The Court of International Trade should reconsider its opinion on the origin of Cyber Power Systems (USA)'s uninterruptible power supplies because the court shirked its responsibility to arrive at the correct determination, the importer said in a reply brief. Even though the trade court ruled against Cyber Power's position that its power supplies are made in the Philippines, it did not take the next step to determine the goods' actual origin, making "no findings of fact regarding manufacture in China," Cyber Power said (Cyber Power Systems (USA) v. United States, CIT # 20-00124).

The Court of International Trade ruled that Turkish exporter Erdemir failed to show the court should revisit its past order allowing four U.S. steel companies to intervene in a case on the International Trade Commission's injury determination on imports of hot-rolled steel from Turkey. Judge Timothy Reif said the four companies make arguments that share a common question of law or fact with the case's main action, would be adversely affected if the court were to rule in Erdemir's favor and would not unduly delay the adjudication of the original parties' rights. However, Reif continued to deny U.S. Steel Corp.'s right to intervene, finding the company did not explain how it would be adversely affected by the decision.

No lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade.