The Court of International Trade should rule that all 14 frozen fruit mixtures imported into the U.S. from Canada by Nature's Touch are properly classified under duty-free subheading 2106.90.98 as “Food preparations not elsewhere specified or included,” Nature's Touch said in a June 27 brief in support of its April 18 motion for summary judgment (see 2204190052) (Nature's Touch Frozen Foods (West). v. U.S., CIT #20-00131).

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.

Antidumping duty petitioner Wheatland Tube Co. wants one of its appeals of an antidumping duty case over whether the Commerce Department can make a particular market situation adjustment to the sales-below-cost test dismissed at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, but says one other appeal should be kept alive. Filing a motion for voluntary dismissal, Wheatland said that its case was held in abeyance pending an appeal of the key case, Hyundai Steel Co v. U.S., to the Supreme Court, in which the Federal Circuit said that Commerce cannot make a PMS adjustment to the sales-below-cost test (see 2112100039). Since no writ of certiorari was filed to the nation's highest court by Wheatland in the Hyundai Steel case, the court should toss the present appeal, the petitioner argued.

Importer Prime Time Commerce failed to exhaust its administrative remedies for its argument that the Commerce Department should look to confidential information to provide "gap-filling" data needed to calculate a rate separate from the China-wide dumping margin for the importer, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said in a June 28 opinion. Sustaining the Court of International Trade, Judges Alan Lourie, Haldane Mayer and Tiffany Cunningham also ruled that while CIT and Commerce erred in not accepting Prime Time's submissions since it is an "interested party," the error was a harmless one.

The Court of International Trade has the authority to order the Labor Department to certify that former AT&T call center employees are eligible for Trade Adjustment Assistance benefits, the former employees said in a June 23 brief. Responding to the court's request for further briefing on the issue of the court's authority, the plaintiffs said that the statutory text, purpose, history and practice all reveal that the court has doled out similar relief in the past and that the trade court can indeed issue the posited relief despite the lack of a ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Former Employees of AT&T Services, Through Communications Workers of America Local 4123 v. United States, CIT #20-00075).

Plaintiffs in a countervailing duty case railed against the Commerce Department's reliance on adverse facts available over the CVD respondents' alleged use of China's Export Buyer's Credit Program, filing a series of four separate briefs at the Court of International Trade. The plaintiffs, led by nonselected respondent Evolutions Flooring, argued that the use of AFA over the EBCP has been "consistently rejected under almost identical factual circumstances," and that Commerce was able to verify non-use of the program without certain information in a different CVD case (Evolutions Flooring v. United States, CIT #21-00591).

The Court of International Trade should not grant Nucor Corporation's stay motion in a countervailing duty case because Nucor has not shown that a stay would facilitate an efficient resolution of the case or conserve the court's resources or that "any duplication of efforts outweighs the detrimental effects of its requested indefinite stay," the U.S. argued in a June 24 reply brief (Nucor Corporation v. United States, CIT #22-00070).

The Court of International Trade granted importer DS Services of America's motion for a preliminary injunction in its case seeking to reinstate a previously granted exclusion from Section 301 China duties for water coolers classified under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 8418.69.0120. The court's order suspends the liquidation of the plaintiff's unliquidated entries while allowing the U.S. to continue to collect Section 301 duties, as the injunction is structured like a statutory injunction routinely entered in antidumping and countervailing duty cases (DS Services of America v. United States, CIT #22-00157).

Importer Global Aluminum Distributor in a June 24 reply brief dropped its opposition to defendant-intervenor Aluminum Extrusions Fair Trade Committee's bid to lift the stay order at the Court of International Trade in an Enforce and Protect Act case looking into aluminum extrusions from China. The action was brought by H&E Home and Classic Metals Suppliers, later joined by Global Aluminum as a consolidated plaintiff, to contest the CBP's finding that the plaintiffs were evading the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on aluminum extrusions by transshipping them through the Dominican Republic. The case was stayed pending the resolution in another matter brought by Global Aluminum over CBP's evasion finding (H&E Home v. United States, CIT Consol. #21-00337).

The Court of International Trade should not grant the U.S.'s motion seeking an extension of time to file a reply brief in a case over whether commercial airline operator NetJets Aviation failed to collect customs user fees for airline ticket purchases, NetJets argued in a June 24 brief. The plaintiff said that the U.S.'s motion seeking the extension is improperly based on the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio's stay rules during mediation since NetJets and CBP also have a case in that court that would resolve the CIT case. The plaintiff said a mediation did not result in a stay in the district court and that no stay had been granted there. NetJets did, though, consent to a shorter extension of time so that the U.S. could file its reply (NetJets Aviation, Inc. v. United States, CIT #21-00142).