Solar cell importers Trina Solar and Astronergy dismissed three cases at the Court of International Trade on Aug. 6 challenging President Donald Trump's decision from his first administration to revoke a Section 201 tariff exclusion for bifacial solar panels. In a separate case, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit sustained Trump's decision, finding that the president didn't clearly misconstrue the statute when he revoked the tariff exclusion (see 2311130031). Jonathan Fried, counsel for Trina and Astronergy, said in an email that the companies "decided to dismiss their actions rather than relitigate the issues" settled by the Federal Circuit (Trina Solar (U.S.) v. U.S, CIT #s 22-00306, -00321) (Astronergy Solar v. U.S., CIT # 22-00308).

CBP improperly classified importer Air Distribution USA's shisha molasses, also known as "hookah tobacco," as a type of "smoking tobacco" and erroneously subjected the shisha molasses to federal excise taxes on "pipe tobacco," Air Distribution argued in a complaint last month at the Court of International Trade (Air Distribution USA v. United States, CIT # 25-00063).

The Commerce Department stuck by its selection of comparable merchandise for chlorinated isocyanurates (chlorinated isos) in its Aug. 4 remand results at the Court of International Trade. However, the agency swapped the surrogate labor data it used in the 2021-22 administrative review of the AD order on Chinese chlorinated isos, which led to small downward adjustments in the AD rates for the two mandatory respondents (Bio-Lab, Inc. v. United States, CIT Consol. # 24-00024).

The Court of International Trade on Aug. 6 dismissed importer Eteros Technologies USA's case against CBP's alleged retaliation for the importer's success in a previous CIT case concerning the admissibility of its marijuana trimmers. Judge Gary Katzmann said the court doesn't have subject-matter jurisdiction to hear the case, since it doesn't arise out of a "law of the United States providing for" trade-related action.

Court of International Trade Judge M. Miller Baker is requiring that any filings before him after Aug. 4 that use generative AI must include a "certification" disclosing that AI was used. Any submission in a case before Baker prepared with the assistance of an AI program "based on natural language prompts -- such as, but not limited to, ChatGPT or Google Bard -- must include a statement" that identifies the program used and the specific part of the text prepared with AI. Counsel also must submit a certification that no confidential information has been disclosed to the AI program. Baker is the second CIT judge to require such disclosure after former Judge Stephen Vaden implemented a similar disclosure requirement when he was on the bench.

The Commerce Department on Aug. 4 switched from a "tier two" to a "tier three" benchmark in calculating the benefit received by countervailing duty respondent JSC Apatit for the provision of natural gas for less than adequate remuneration. Responding to the Court of International Trade's remand order in a case on the 2020-21 administrative review of the CVD order on phosphate fertilizer from Russia, Commerce adjusted Apatit's CVD rate from 28.50% to 49.64% (Archer Daniels Midland Co. v. United States, CIT # 23-00239).

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.

The Court of International Trade on Aug. 6 dismissed importer Eteros Technologies USA's case alleging that CBP retaliated against the company for its success at the trade court regarding the admissibility of its marijuana trimmers. Judge Gary Katzmann said the court doesn't have jurisdiction to hear the case under Section 1581(i), which says CIT will hear cases arising out of a "law of the United States providing for" various trade-related actions. The judge held that Eteros' allegations don't arise out of any trade-related U.S. laws. Katzmann also held that no relief is needed to effectuate the trade court's prior ruling in favor of Eteros, since no party disputes that CBP complied with CIT's "specific directive" to release Eteros' marijuana trimmers.

Importers Learning Resources and Hand2Mind urged the Supreme Court on Aug. 5 to take up their challenge to the legality of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act prior to their case being heard before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit on the grounds that the high court may need to do so to hear the case in tandem with the lead lawsuit on the IEEPA tariffs. The importers said the Solicitor General himself suggested this course of action (Learning Resources v. Donald J. Trump, Sup. Ct. # 24-1287).

The Court of International Trade on Aug. 1 dismissed two cases from importer ArcelorMittal Long Products Canada for lack of prosecution. The cases were placed on the customs case management calendar but weren't removed at the "expiration of the applicable period of time of removal." The lawsuits concerned CBP's denial of its protest claiming its steel products should be excluded from Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs. Counsel for the importer didn't immediately respond to requests for comment (ArcelorMittal Long Products Canada v. United States, #s 21-00342, -00343).