The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruling to overturn a Court of International Trade decision that called into question the use of first sale treatment for imported goods involving non-market economy countries (see 2208110060) is largely seen as providing a welcome relief to importers, several law firms said. "For those importers enjoying the benefits of lower declared values and duties, particularly from China in light of Section 301 tariffs, there is no longer a need for concern now that, on appeal, the court has given first sale a nod," Sandler Travis lawyer Lenny Feldman said on a podcast. The original CIT decision (Meyer Corporation v. U.S., Fed. Cir. #21-1392) raised some concerns for the future of first sale treatment (see 2104200028).

Lawyers for the Section 301 test-case plaintiffs, HMTX Industries and Jasco Products, have until Sept. 14 to file their response to the Aug. 1 remand results on the Lists 3 and 4A tariffs from the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, said a scheduling order Monday from the three-judge panel at the U.S. Court of International Trade. DOJ’s reply is due Oct. 28, said the order. The two sides, in a joint status report earlier Monday, agreed on the Sept. 14 date for the plaintiffs to respond to USTR’s remand results, but the government asked for 60 days to Nov. 14 to file its reply, while the plaintiffs asked for the government's reply within 30 days, by Oct. 14. The court also gave the plaintiffs until Nov. 14 to respond to the government’s reply, rejecting DOJ's request to deny the plaintiffs the opportunity for a response. The court “will determine if oral argument is necessary” on USTR's remand results after briefing is complete, said the order. The plaintiffs requested oral argument, and the government took no position on the request.

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

Lawyers for the Section 301 test-case plaintiffs HMTX Industries and Jasco Products have until Sept. 14 to file their response to the Aug. 1 remand results on the lists 3 and 4A tariffs from the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, said an Aug. 15 scheduling order from the three-judge panel at the Court of International Trade. DOJ’s reply is due 44 days later, by Oct. 28, the order said. The two sides, in a joint status report, had agreed on the Sept. 14 date for the plaintiffs to respond to USTR’s remand results, but the government asked for 60 days to Nov. 14 to file its reply, while the plaintiffs asked for the government's reply within 30 days, by Oct. 14.

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.

Akin Gump lawyers for the Section 301 test plaintiffs and DOJ agree that plaintiffs’ comments on the Aug. 1 Lists 3 and 4A tariff remand results by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (see 2208020016) and a government response to those comments would aid the court’s evaluation of the remand results, said the two sides in a joint status report filed Monday in docket 1:21-cv-52 at the U.S. Court of International Trade. They propose that plaintiffs’ comments would be due Sept. 14 and DOJ’s response 30 days later, but the government says the plaintiffs aren't entitled to file a reply to the government’s response, as plaintiffs want to do by Nov. 4, said the report. The sides also disagree on the page limits for future filings, it said. Plaintiffs also are requesting oral argument on the remand results, but the government takes no position on the request.

The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Aug. 8-14:

Akin Gump lawyers for the Section 301 test plaintiffs and DOJ agree that plaintiffs’ comments on the Aug. 1 lists 3 and 4A tariff remand results by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (see 2208020016) and a government response to those comments would aid the court’s evaluation of the remand results, the two sides said in a joint status report filed Aug. 15 in docket 1:21-cv-52 at the Court of International Trade. They propose that plaintiffs’ comments would be due Sept. 14 and DOJ’s response 30 days later, but the government says the plaintiffs are not entitled to file a reply to the government’s response, as plaintiffs want to do by Nov. 4, the report said. The sides also disagree on the page limits for any future filings, it said. Plaintiffs also are requesting oral argument on the remand results, but the government takes no position on the request.

Lawyers for the Section 301 test-case plaintiffs HMTX Industries and Jasco Products have until Sept. 14 to file their response to the Aug. 1 remand results on the lists 3 and 4A tariffs from the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, said an Aug. 15 scheduling order from the three-judge panel at the Court of International Trade. DOJ’s reply is due 44 days later, by Oct. 28, the order said. The two sides, in a joint status report, had agreed on the Sept. 14 date for the plaintiffs to respond to USTR’s remand results, but the government asked for 60 days to Nov. 14 to file its reply, while the plaintiffs asked for the government's reply within 30 days, by Oct. 14.

President Joe Biden is less likely to suspend some Section 301 tariffs on goods from China following a recent visit by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., to Taiwan, Sidley Austin lawyer Ted Murphy said in a blog post. "Before the visit, our view was that the Administration was leaning toward suspending some of the duties," he said. "China’s reaction to the Speaker’s visit, coupled with the fact that this is an election year, however, makes it hard to see that happening now. In our view, any action on the Section 301 duties will likely be tabled until after the November election."