Exporter Hyundai Steel continued to challenge the Commerce Department's finding that the South Korean government's cap-and-trade carbon emissions program was de jure specific, in comments on the agency's remand results filed at the Court of International Trade on June 13 (Hyundai Steel Co. v. United States, CIT # 22-00029).

Importer Marcatus QED filed a complaint on June 13 at the Court of International Trade, claiming that the Commerce Department erred in finding that the company's shipments of preserved garlic in brine fell within the scope of the antidumping duty order on fresh garlic from China (Marcatus QED v. United States, CIT # 24-00091).

The Court of International Trade in a text-only June 12 order sent a customs case on importer Cozy Comfort's wearable blanket, the "Comfy," to trial after the company claimed that there was a genuine factual dispute at issue in the case. Judge Stephen Vaden ordered a bench trial for the case to be held Oct. 21 following oral argument on June 12 (Cozy Comfort Co. v. United States, CIT # 22-00173).

The U.S. asked the Court of International Trade on June 12 to order importer Rayson Global and its owner Doris Cheng to pay over $5.8 million for skirting antidumping and Section 301 duties on uncovered mattress innersprings from China as part of a default judgment against the two defendants (United States v. Rayson Global, CIT # 23-00201).

The Court of International Trade on June 12 rejected customs broker Seko Customs Brokerage's motion for an expedited briefing schedule on its motion for an injunction in its suit against CBP's suspension of the company from participation in the Entry Type 86 and Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism programs (Seko Customs Brokerage v. U.S., CIT # 24-00097).

The Court of International Trade on June 11 sustained the Commerce Department's remand results in an antidumping duty investigation on Indonesian biodiesel after the agency disregarded Indonesian crude palm oil prices when constructing normal value for respondent Wilmar Trading.

The U.S. told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on June 10 that the Court of International Trade correctly found that sales between Canada-based Midwest-CBK and its U.S. customers met the requirement of being sold "for exportation into the United States" and thus were properly liquidated using transaction value with a 75.75% "uplift" to the goods' valuation. Goods are meant for export to the U.S. when they are "clearly destined for the United States at the time of the sale," which the goods at issue were, the government said (Midwest-CBK v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 24-1142).

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.

Customs broker Seko Logistics asked the Court of International Trade on June 7 for expedited briefing in its suit against CBP's suspension of the company from Type 86 filing and the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism. Seko said greater delay in the case "deprives the requested relief of much of its value" and sets "extraordinary hardship" on the broker (Seko Customs Brokerage v. U.S., CIT # 24-00097).

The Court of International Trade on June 10 signaled that CBP's practice of not notifying companies when they become subject to interim Enforce and Protect Act investigations could give rise to a due process claim should the company sufficiently allege that it suffered "specific enough harm." However, the court found that importer Phoenix Metal failed to allege that harm with enough specificity.