Several trade groups representing shippers, the maritime industry and U.S. ports criticized the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative's Section 301 determination last week calling for a phased-in approach to levy fees on foreign-built vessels and car-carrying vessels docking at U.S. ports as part of a broader push to build and bolster an American shipbuilding industry (see 2504180018).

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

Importers van Gelder Inc. and Baker Hughes Pressure Control each dropped their customs suit at the Court of International Trade last week. Van Gelder had filed suit to challenge the classification of its vinyl tiles floor covering, seeking an exclusion from Section 301 China tariffs (see 2405060033). Meanwhile, Baker Hughes had launched its case to claim that its steel parts of Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 7326.90.8588, dutiable at 2.9%, should be classified under subheadings 8481.90.9085 and 8431.43.4000, free of duty (see 2306300068). Counsel for both importers didn't respond to requests for comment (van Gelder Inc. v. United States, CIT # 21-00160) (Baker Hughes Pressure Control v. United States, CIT # 23-00137).

Several trade groups representing shippers, the maritime industry and U.S. ports criticized the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative's Section 301 determination last week calling for a phased-in approach to levy fees on foreign-built vessels and car-carrying vessels docking at U.S. ports as part of a broader push to build and bolster an American shipbuilding industry (see 2504180018).

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative is planning a phased-in approach to assessing fees on foreign-built vessels calling at U.S. ports, according to an April 17 announcement unveiling the results of its year-long Section 301 investigation.

Plywood importer Interglobal Forest defended April 10 its attempt to have the Court of International Trade take judicial notice of three items from other proceedings: a stipulated judgment, a motion for entry of confession of judgment and a discovery response (American Pacific Plywood v. United States, CIT Consol. # 20-03914).

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative is planning a phased-in approach to assessing fees on foreign-built vessels calling at U.S. ports, according to an April 17 announcement unveiling the results of its year-long Section 301 investigation.

The Court of International Trade partly granted vehicle accessories importer Keystone Automotive Operations’ request for reconsideration of an Oct. 7 decision. CIT Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves said she had conducted a “traditional eo nomine versus principal use analysis” in her decision, but that Keystone had actually argued that the United States Trade Representative had outlined a “new legal standard” for applying the relevant Section 301 tariff exclusion (Keystone Automotive Operations v. United States, CIT # 21-00215).

CBP improperly classified importer AB Specialty Silicones' specialty silicone chemicals as organic-silicone compounds instead of as silicone compounds or organo-inorganic compounds, AB argued in an April 16 complaint at the Court of International Trade (AB Specialty Silicones v. United States, CIT # 25-00067).

The lawsuit at the Court of International Trade challenging President Donald Trump's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose tariffs has been assigned to a three-judge panel. Judges Gary Katzmann, Timothy Reif and Jane Restani will hear the case, according to an order from CIT Chief Judge Mark Barnett (V.O.S. Selections v. Donald J. Trump, CIT # 25-00066).