Mandatory antidumping duty respondent Linyi Chengen Import and Export Co., along with 25 plywood exporters, urged the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to uphold the Court of International Trade's decision giving Chengen and the separate rate respondents a zero percent dumping margin in the AD investigation on hardwood plywood from China (Linyi Chengen Import and Export Co. v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 24-1258).

The Court of International Trade in a confidential decision July 17 sustained in part and remanded in part the Commerce Department's final determination in the antidumping duty investigation on preserved mushrooms from the Netherlands. Judge M. Miller Baker said he will make the decision public on July 25. U.S. mushroom producer Giorgio Foods contested Commerce's pick of Germany as the third-country comparison market and its decision not to use adverse facts available against respondent Prochamp (see 2307240018) (Giorgio Foods v. U.S., CIT # 23-00133).

The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:

An importer arguing that its Chinese-origin garlic that is boiled, then frozen shouldn’t be subject to antidumping duties on fresh garlic from China filed a motion for judgment in the Court of International Trade on July 15 (Export Packers Company Limited v. U.S., CIT # 24-00061).

The Commerce Department improperly decided that it can use Romania as the primary surrogate in the 2021-22 antidumping duty review on chlorinated isocyanurates from China after Romania wasn't submitted as a potential surrogate prior to the surrogate country comment deadline, exporters Heze Huayi Chemical Co. and Juancheng Kangtai Chemical Co. argued (Bio-Lab v. United States, CIT Consol. # 24-00024).

In a heavily redacted public brief, a mattress petitioner pushed back on several complex conclusions reached by the Commerce Department on remand regarding an antidumping duty order review on mattresses from Indonesia (PT. Zinus Global Indonesia v. U.S., CIT # 21-00277).

Loper Bright was cited yet again -- this time in a challenge to a sunset review’s finding that a softwood lumber exporter probably would continue dumping its products in the absence antidumping duties -- as attorneys continue trying to define the new limits of judicial discretion in the post-Chevron era (see 2406280051) (Resolute FP Canada v. U.S., CIT # 23-00095).

Hoverboards are toys, not transportation devices, an importer argued in a motion for judgment filed July 12 in one of a couple of identical classification disputes it has brought in recent years (see 2110150056 and 2112100053) (3BTech v. U.S., CIT # 21-00026).

Importer Amsted Rail Co. and its Mexican maquiladora affiliate ASF-K Mexico told the Court of International Trade on July 15 that the Commerce Department's failure to disqualify its former counsel, Buchanan Ingersoll partner Daniel Pickard, invalidates the agency's antidumping duty investigation on freight rail couplers from Mexico. Filing a motion for judgment, ARC said Pickard "betrayed" the company by using its information against it in an AD petition and that it didn't consent to Pickard representing an opposing party (Amsted Rail Co. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00242).

The Court of International Trade in a confidential July 15 order denied customs broker Seko Customs Brokerage's application for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction against CBP's temporary suspension of the company from the Entry Type 86 pilot and the Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism program. Judge Claire Kelly said she intends to issue a public version of the opinion "on or shortly after" July 23, giving the litigants until July 22 to review the confidential information in the decision (Seko Customs Brokerage v. U.S., CIT # 24-00097).