The U.S. Court of International Trade plans to “proceed first” on choosing a “representative sample” of test cases to manage the roughly 3,500 Section 301 complaints inundating the court, said an order (in Pacer) signed Tuesday by the three-judge panel of Mark Barnett, Claire Kelly and Jennifer Choe-Groves. All the suits seek to get the Lists 3 and 4A Chinese tariffs vacated and the duties refunded with interest. “The court expects that the number of sample cases identified will be small enough to permit the efficient disposition of this litigation while allowing the court to consider all claims raised by the various Plaintiffs,” said the order. “The court anticipates issuing a stay of all Section 301 cases assigned to the panel that are not selected to proceed as sample cases.” It set a March 19 deadline for plaintiff attorneys to submit a “coordinated proposal” on the test cases and to suggest lawyers to sit on a steering committee. Lawyers who think their complaint “would not be represented by a sample case proposal” or feel they belong on the steering committee have until March 26 to appeal, it said. Most court observers think the first-filed HMTX Industries/Jasco Products litigation is a shoo-in for one of the test cases. Virtually all the complaints argue the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative overstepped its Section 301 authority under the 1974 Trade Act by imposing retaliatory tariffs against the Chinese and that it violated the Administrative Procedure Act by running tariff rulemakings that lacked transparency. A few complaints make the additional argument that USTR acted unconstitutionally by taxing importers.

TCL’s North American smartphone subsidiary became one of the largest importers to join the massive Section 301 litigation when it filed a complaint (in Pacer) Friday in the U.S. Court of International Trade. Like the roughly 3,500 other lawsuits inundating the court, TCT Mobile (US) seeks to get the List 3 and 4A tariffs on Chinese goods vacated and the duties refunded with interest. TCT's claims “accrued with each and every entry of products” with List 3 or 4A tariff exposure, said the company. The action was filed within two years of the date that TCT paid the duties, it said, satisfying the court’s statute of limitations requirement on the timeliness of complaints. “With a mobile handset product portfolio that includes TCL and Alcatel devices,” TCT is “the fourth largest handset manufacturer in North America,” it said. The complaint lists two dozen import categories for which TCT has List 3 or 4A tariff exposure. Most are for capital goods, packaging materials or components, including lithium-ion batteries. Finished smartphones that TCT imports from China under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule’s 8517.12.00 subheading are on List 4B. The Trump administration postponed indefinitely the 15% tariffs on List 4B goods from taking effect in December 2019 after reaching the phase one trade deal with China (see 1912130042).

The U.S. Court of International Trade plans to “proceed first” on choosing a “representative sample” of test cases to manage the roughly 3,500 Section 301 complaints inundating the court, said an order (in Pacer) signed Tuesday by the three-judge panel of Mark Barnett, Claire Kelly and Jennifer Choe-Groves. All the suits seek to get the Lists 3 and 4A Chinese tariffs vacated and the duties refunded with interest. “The court expects that the number of sample cases identified will be small enough to permit the efficient disposition of this litigation while allowing the court to consider all claims raised by the various Plaintiffs,” said the order. “The court anticipates issuing a stay of all Section 301 cases assigned to the panel that are not selected to proceed as sample cases.” It set a March 19 deadline for plaintiff attorneys to submit a “coordinated proposal” on the test cases and to suggest lawyers to sit on a steering committee. Lawyers who think their complaint “would not be represented by a sample case proposal” or feel they belong on the steering committee have until March 26 to appeal, it said. Most court observers think the first-filed HMTX Industries/Jasco Products litigation is a shoo-in for one of the test cases. Virtually all the complaints argue the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative overstepped its Section 301 authority under the 1974 Trade Act by imposing retaliatory tariffs against the Chinese and that it violated the Administrative Procedure Act by running tariff rulemakings that lacked transparency. A few complaints make the additional argument that USTR acted unconstitutionally by taxing importers.

Many expect trade policy under the Biden administration to be more worker-focused than consumer-focused, but many specifics remain undecided. “The jury is still out on what that pro-worker trade policy will look like in practice,” said Joshua Boswell, a lawyer at Crowell & Moring. Boswell spoke to a webinar audience Feb. 17 on the 2021 trade outlook and said such predictions don't tell you much about tariffs, free trade negotiations or trade remedies in and of themselves.

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

TCL Communication Technology Holdings’ North American smartphone subsidiary became one of the largest importers to join the massive Section 301 litigation when it filed a complaint Feb. 12 in the Court of International Trade. Like the roughly 3,500 other lawsuits inundating the court, TCT Mobile (US) seeks to get the lists 3 and 4A tariffs on Chinese goods vacated and the duties refunded with interest. TCT's claims “accrued with each and every entry of products” with List 3 or List 4A tariff exposure, the company said. The “instant action” was filed within two years of the date that TCT paid the lists 3 and 4A duties, it said, satisfying the court’s two-year statute of limitations on the timeliness of complaints.

International Trade Today is providing readers with the top stories from Feb. 8-12 in case they were missed. All articles can be found by searching on the titles or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.

The U.S. Court of International Trade plans to “proceed first” on choosing a “representative sample” of test cases to manage the roughly 3,500 Section 301 complaints inundating the court, said an order signed Feb. 16 by the three-judge panel of Mark Barnett, Claire Kelly and Jennifer Choe-Groves. All the suits seek to get the List 3 and List 4A Chinese tariffs vacated and the duties refunded with interest. “The court expects that the number of sample cases identified will be small enough to permit the efficient disposition of this litigation while allowing the court to consider all claims raised by the various Plaintiffs,” the order said. “The court anticipates issuing a stay of all Section 301 cases assigned to the panel that are not selected to proceed as sample cases.”

Board members and people who provide services to foreign-trade zones talked about what the National Association of Foreign-Trade Zones should work on now that it lost the battle on USMCA rules of origin treatment for goods produced in those zones. “Now that provision’s back in the act, it’s going to be a real challenge,” said Melissa Irmen, chair of the NAFTZ board. The group wants to make sure a U.S.-United Kingdom free trade agreement doesn't prohibit goods made in FTZs from qualifying for rules of origin, as USMCA does. “They are concerned that the USMCA approach could be a precedent.”

IRobot is adding contract manufacturers and new lines to boost production in Malaysia over 2021, after a 25% tariff on Roomba robot vacuums imported from China was reinstated at the start the year, said Chief Financial Officer Julie Zeiler on the company’s Thursday earnings call. The company expects to have enough capacity by year-end to support most of its 2022 North American volume requirement, at an anticipated $41 million-$43 million in incremental costs. The company incurred $38 million in Trade Act Section 301 tariff costs in 2019 (see 2007220022).