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

The Court of International Trade was wrong to dismiss the government's case against importer Katana Racing seeking to collect over $5.7 million in unpaid duties due to an expired statute of limitations, the U.S. argued in its Sept. 13 opening brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The government's suit was in fact timely filed since Katana could not revoke its waiver of the statute of limitations, the brief said. The U.S. said no law backs the finding that such a waiver could be revoked and stop the government from filing suit for unpaid duties, and that the trade court's ruling "leads to absurd results" (U.S. v. Katana Racing, Fed. Cir. #22-1832).

The Commerce Department properly found that a particular EU subsidy to Spanish olive growers was de facto specific, the Court of International Trade ruled in a Sept. 14 opinion. After previously remanding the case twice, Judge Gary Katzmann this time bought Commerce's rationale for its de facto specificity finding, along with the agency's conclusion that demand for ripe olives -- the subject merchandise -- was substantially dependent on the demand for certain raw olive varietals.

The Court of International Trade “bent over backwards” to allow the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative to comply with its Administrative Procedure Act obligations in its imposition of the lists 3 and 4A Section 301 tariffs on Chinese goods when it remanded the duties to the agency for further explanation on the rationale for the actions it took in the context of the comments it received, said an amicus brief filed Sept. 14 in the massive Section 301 litigation from the Retail Litigation Center, CTA, the National Retail Federation and four other trade associations. With USTR’s “non-responsive” answer to the remand order, the time has come for the court “to impose the normal remedy for unlawful agency action” and to vacate the lists 3 and 4A tariffs, it said (In Re Section 301 Cases, CIT #21-00052).

The Court of International Trade, in a departure from a string of past rulings, said in a Sept. 13 opinion that the Commerce Department properly used adverse facts available over China's Export Buyer's Credit Program in a countervailing duty case. Judge M. Miller Baker ruled that Commerce "reasonably explained" why it needed key information from the Chinese government, which wasn't provided, to determine whether the CVD respondents and their U.S. customers used the EBCP. Otherwise, the attempt at verification "amounted to 'looking for a needle in a haystack with the added uncertainty that Commerce might not even be able to identify the needle when it was found,'" the judge said.

CBP recently asked Commerce for a scope ruling in an Enforce and Protect Act investigation involving whether imports of rough fittings originated in China and processed in Vietnam prior are evading the antidumping duty order on carbon steel butt-weld pipe fittings from China (A-570-814), according to a recently released Sept. 6 notice.

Plaintiffs in a case challenging President Donald Trump's decision to withdraw a tariff exclusion for bifacial solar panels reserved all their rights to the extent that the plaintiffs are affected by the U.S.'s inadvertent liquidations of the entries at issue in the action, the plaintiffs said in a Sept. 13 reply brief. The reserved rights include, but are not limited to, "opposing the Government’s actions and legal authority to void liquidations without court approval and without providing specificity that would allow for meaningful comment, the brief said (Solar Energy Industries Association v. United States, CIT #20-03941).

The Court of International Trade in a Sept. 13 confidential order upheld parts and sent back parts of the Commerce Department's final determination in the antidumping duty investigation on refillable stainless steel kegs from China. In a letter, Judge M. Miller Baker said he intends to issue the public version of the opinion Sept. 21, giving the parties until Sept. 20 to review the confidential information in the opinion. In the case, Commerce dropped its reliance on Malaysian surrogate data after the trade court raised questions over the distortive effects of forced labor in Malaysia (see 2111050033). While the plaintiff, American Keg Co., signed off on this move, the plaintiff continued to oppose Commerce's surrogate data pick, pushing instead for Brazilian surrogate data (New American Keg d/b/a American Keg Co. v. U.S., CIT #20-00008).

The Commerce Department legally dropped its reliance on adverse facts available for whether countervailing duty respondent Both-Well (Taizhou) Steel Fittings Co. benefitted from China's Export Buyer's Credit Program, the Court of International Trade held in a Sept. 13 opinion. Judge Claire Kelly previously sent back Commerce's use of adverse facts available over the Chinese government's unwillingness to submit certain information about its EBCP. The judge said that if the agency wanted to keep using AFA it had to attempt to verify the non-use of the program by looking at evidence from Both-Well and its U.S. customers. Commerce did so on remand, finding that the respondent did not benefit from the EBCP, dropping the company's CVD rate from 25.90% to 15.36%.

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.