Opposing the United States’ and New Zealand's claims to the contrary (see 2506040068), environmental group Maui and Hector’s Dolphin Defenders NZ again said June 10 that New Zealand’s incidental bycatch regulations and its zero mortality rate goal for endangered Maui dolphins weren’t as strong as the U.S. regulations, rendering unsustainable a National Marine Fisheries Service comparability finding (Maui and Hector's Dolphin Defenders NZ v. National Marine Fisheries Service, CIT # 24-00218).

An individual importer, Ricardo Vega, will receive refunds for a Porsche imported in 2023, according to a stipulated judgment filed at the Court of International Trade on June 17. Similarly, importers Yellowbird Enterprises and Vantage Point Services will receive refunds for duties paid on a Jaguar also entered in 2023.

Opposing the Commerce Department’s continued determination on remand that "rough" carbon steel butt-weld pipe fittings from China that were processed into finished fittings in Vietnam weren't of Chinese origin (see 2505050031), domestic producers Tube Forgings of America and Mills Iron Works again argued that “rough” pipe fittings are the same as “unfinished” ones (Tube Forgings of America, Inc. v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 23-00231).

The Court of International Trade on June 17 let exporter Toyo Kohan Co. amend its complaint in an antidumping duty case to add a claim against the Commerce Department's use of the Cohen's d test to detect "masked" dumping in light of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's decision rejecting Commerce's use of the test. Judge Jane Restani said the CAFC decision "fundamentally shifted the legal standard controlling" the agency's use of the test, meaning "justice requires" the exporter be allowed to raise its claim against the test.

The Court of International Trade on June 17 denied importer Global Aluminum Distributor's motion for attorney's fees in an Enforce and Protect Act case. Judge Richard Eaton held that the government's position in the EAPA case was "substantially justified" (H&E Home v. United States, CIT Consol. # 21-00337).

U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer urged the Supreme Court to reject two importers' bid to have the high court hear their case on whether the International Emergency Economic Powers Act provides for tariffs on an expedited basis. Sauer said the importers, Learning Resources and Hand2Mind, haven't justified "such a stark departure from established practice," which would see the Supreme Court take up the case prior to the U.S. Court of Appeal for the D.C. Circuit weighing in (Learning Resources v. Trump, Sup. Ct. # 24-1287).

The importer seeking class certification at the Court of International Trade to obtain refunds for tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act voluntarily dismissed its case June 16. Counsel for the importer didn't respond to a request for comment (Chapter1 v. United States, CIT # 25-00097).

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 Comfy, a "wearable, oversized item covering the front and back with a hood, sleeves, ribbed cuffs, and a marsupial pocket," is a pullover and not a blanket, the Court of International Trade held on June 16. Issuing a decision after a five-day bench trial held last year, Judge Stephen Vaden said, as a matter of fact, The Comfy doesn't protect against "extreme cold," and that, as a matter of law, the item fits under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 6110, which provides for pullovers.

The U.S. last week filed a supplemental brief regarding its motion to dismiss importer Houston Shutters' Section 1581(i) case at the Court of International Trade against the Commerce Department's failure to open a changed circumstances review of antidumping duty and countervailing duty determinations on wood moldings and millwork products from China." In the brief, the government discussed a 2010 ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Trustees in Bankruptcy of North American Rubber Thread Co. v. U.S., which the U.S. says supports dismissal of the suit for lack of jurisdiction (Houston Shutters v. United States, CIT # 24-00193).