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.

U.S. steel manufacturer Maverick Tube lied to the Commerce Department when it objected to importer Maple Leaf Marketing's Section 232 steel and aluminum tariff exclusion requests, MLM told the Court of International Trade in a March 18 brief. As such, Commerce's Bureau of Industry and Security's decision to deny these requests cannot be sustained, MLM argued. It urged the trade court to remand the case so Commerce can add communications the agency had with a subject matter expert on whose word the exclusion requests were denied (Maple Leaf Marketing v. United States, CIT #20-00125).

The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania dismissed a case brought by steel company NLMK Pennsylvania and Indiana alleging that U.S. Steel lied to the Commerce Department to get NLMK's requests for exclusions from Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs denied. Judge William Stickman said it's unclear whether NLMK submitted a viable claim of unfair competition under Pennsylvania state law, but even if it did, federal law preempts the claim (NLMK Pennsylvania v. U.S. Steel Corporation, W.D. Pa. #21-00273).

The Court of International Trade extended the mediation period for a case brought by Evraz challenging the Commerce Department's denial of the importer's Section 232 steel and aluminum tariff exclusion requests. In the March 15 order, the trade court gave the parties until April 29 to resolve litigation led by Judge Leo Gordon. Evraz called for mediation, along with other litigants, to discuss the availability of a remedy for already liquidated entries (Evraz Inc. v. United States, CIT #20-03869).

The Court of International Trade granted steel importer North American Interpipe refunds on Section 232 steel and aluminum duties it paid following court mediation over the company's challenge to the U.S.'s denials of NAI's exclusion requests from the tariffs. Per the public stipulated judgment on agreed-upon fact, Judge M. Miller Baker penned an order which declares that NAI may not appeal (North American Interpipe v. United States, CIT #20-03825).

The Court of International Trade failed to consider all the relevant statutory language, legislative history and facts when it ruled in three recent opinions that Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs can be deducted from a respondent's U.S. price in antidumping duty calculations, Nippon Steel told the trade court in a motion for judgment Feb. 25. Nippon argued the tariffs should be considered remedial, not ordinary customs duties eligible for deductions (Nippon Steel Corporation v. U.S., CIT #21-00533).

The Court of International Trade dismissed three customs cases brought by California importer Mirror Metals in a series of three orders for lack of prosecution. All three cases were filed in February 2020 and concern CBP's assessment of Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs on the company's various metal articles. Filed under Section 1581(a), the cases contested the Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security's denial of Mirror Metals' exclusion requests (Mirror Metals v. U.S., CIT #20-00039, -00040, -00041). While the importer has two other nearly identical cases filed at CIT, it also has a case filed under Section 1581(i), the trade court's "residual" jurisdiction, to contest the BIS exclusion denials that the court has found to be the proper jurisdictional outlet. Most recently in that case, the trade court remanded the denials to BIS for further review (see 2111190056).

The Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security granted importer CPW America Co.'s bid for exclusions from paying Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs following a remand order from the Court of International Trade. In a Feb. 23 submission, BIS said that there was not sufficient domestic U.S. capacity of line pipe to justify rejecting CPW's exclusion requests (CPW America Co. v. United States, CIT #21-00335).

The Court of International Trade reported Feb. 8 that mediation over certain elements of a Section 232 exclusion denial challenge resulted in a settlement of all issues. The trade court reported the same outcome for two similar cases Feb. 4 (see 2202040041). The mediation was held by Judge Leo Gordon and was ordered after the plaintiffs, Voestalpine High Performance Metals Corp. and Edro Specialty Steels, wanted a status conference to discuss the availability of a remedy for already liquidated entries. Specifics of the mediation were not made known. Voestalpine and Edro brought their case to CIT to contest the denial of 502 exclusion requests for high alloyed specialty steel products (see 2110010032) (Voestalpine High Performance Metals v. U.S., CIT #21-00093).

No lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade.