The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices Nov. 6 on AD/CVD proceedings:
The Commerce Department correctly found that lemon juice exporter Louis Dreyfus Co. (LDC) was not affiliated with its unnamed primary fresh lemon supplier and correctly applied a de minimis rate to LDC, the company said in its Nov. 1 reply brief at the Court of International Trade, coming on the heels of a similar brief by DOJ (see 2311020024) (Ventura Coastal v. U.S., CIT # 23-00009).
The U.S. Supreme Court should deny the Oct. 26 motion of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and his two co-plaintiffs in Kennedy v. Biden (docket 3:23-cv-00381) to intervene in its review of the social media injunction against officials from the White House and four federal agencies (see 2310270001), said the government’s opposition response Thursday (docket 23-411). SCOTUS has distributed the Kennedy plaintiffs’ intervenor motion for the justices’ Nov. 17 conference (see 2311010038).
U.S. District Judge Thomas Durkin for Northern Illinois in Chicago granted SoftBank’s motion to dismiss a complaint for lack of jurisdiction and improper venue for its role in T-Mobile's 2020 Sprint buy. But the judge also denied the joint T-Mobile-SoftBank motion to dismiss the antitrust complaint for failure to state a claim, in his signed memorandum opinion and order Thursday (docket 1:22-cv-03189).
U.S. District Judge Thomas Durkin for Northern Illinois in Chicago granted SoftBank’s motion to dismiss a complaint for lack of jurisdiction and improper venue for its role in T-Mobile's 2020 Sprint buy. But the judge also denied the joint T-Mobile-SoftBank motion to dismiss the antitrust complaint for failure to state a claim, in his signed memorandum opinion and order Thursday (docket 1:22-cv-03189).
The Commerce Department published notices in the Federal Register Nov. 3 on the following AD/CV duty proceedings (any notices that announce changes to AD/CV duty rates, scope, affected firms or effective dates will be detailed in another ITT article):
U.S. District Judge Edgardo Ramos for Southern New York in Manhattan granted the FTC’s motion to strike defendants Iqvia and Propel Media’ s constitutional and equitable defenses with prejudice, said his signed opinion and order Tuesday (docket 1:23-cv-06188). The FTC argued that defenses asserted by Iqvia in the antitrust case should be dismissed on grounds that several raise constitutional challenges to the FTC’s powers that are “immaterial” and “impertinent” to the “narrow inquiry” that the court must undertake pursuant to the FTC Act in evaluating a claim for a preliminary injunction. The FTC seeks to enjoin Iqvia from completing its purchase of Propel Media (see 2310120051), saying the proposed acquisition would “substantially lessen competition by combining two of the top three providers of programmatic advertising targeted specifically at U.S.-based [healthcare professionals] on a one-to-one basis.” The court agreed with the FTC that the defenses are either “legally insufficient or inadequately pled and that the FTC would be prejudiced by their inclusion.” The state of the law in the Second Circuit is “well settled” that a laches defense is not available against the government when it is protecting the public interest, “and there can be no dispute that the FTC commenced this action to protect the public interest,” said the order. Defendants' asserted that the doctrine of equitable estoppel “binds the FTC to the claims, assertions, and admissions made by the U.S. Government about the digital advertising industry” in a suit pending against Google in the Eastern District of Virginia. But Ramos said that suit alleges that under sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act, Google is a monopolist in digital advertising and has significant market share as a demand-side platform. Equitable estoppel may apply where “(1) the party to be estopped makes a misrepresentation of fact to the other party with reason to believe that the other party will rely on it; (2) and the other party reasonably relies upon it; (3) to her detriment,” Ramos said, citing Kosakow v. New Rochelle Radiology Associates. But it is “well established” that “the Government may not be estopped on the same terms as any other litigant,” he said, and, citing Davila v. Lang, only “’in the most serious of circumstances’ when a party has reasonably and detrimentally relied on the government’s misrepresentation, and the government has engaged in affirmative misconduct.” Defendants here “do not provide any allegations making it plausible that they can satisfy the estoppel requirements -- even before accounting for the higher standard to invoke the defense against the government,” he said. Allowing the estoppel defense to remain “would prejudice the SEC by needlessly lengthening and complicating the discovery process and trial of this matter.”
The Commerce Department and the International Trade Commission published the following Federal Register notices Nov. 3 on AD/CVD proceedings:
An Oct. 18 COVID-19 diagnosis forced the office of California Attorney General Rob Bonta (D) to ask the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals late Wednesday to extend until Dec. 13 the deadline for Bonta’s opening brief in his appeal of the district court's Sept. 18 decision granting NetChoice’s motion for a preliminary injunction to block him from enforcing the state’s Age Appropriate Design Code (see 2310190030), said the office’s unopposed motion (docket 23-2969). Bonta’s lead attorney, Deputy AG Elizabeth Watson, was diagnosed with COVID-19 and “continues to experience symptoms,” said the motion. Watson has returned to work, “and will be working to meet and prepare for various deadlines in other matters,” many of which her illness also affected, during the briefing period, it said. The briefing in the law's appeal “will cover novel legal issues that deserve careful consideration and diligent research, including the appropriate standard of review for laws regulating the collection and use of data,” said the motion. Other attorneys will need to review the briefing before it’s “finalized and filed,” it said. Any “lesser” deadline extension than the 28 days requested “would result in briefing being due on or around the Thanksgiving holiday,” said the motion. Counsel for NetChoice consents to the requested extension with the “understanding” that Bonta’s office won’t oppose a similar extension for NetChoice in the future, it said. Bonta’s office also agreed not to seek a stay of the preliminary injunction order currently in place, said the motion. Under the agreed-on proposed revised schedule, NetChoice’s answering brief would be due Feb. 7, and Bonta’s reply brief would be due March 13, it said. In granting the preliminary injunction, the U.S. District Court for Northern California held that NetChoice was likely to succeed on the merits of its argument that the law violates the First Amendment. The lower court also held that the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act and the Communications Decency Act's Section 230 preempt it. Bonta filed his notice of appeal Oct. 18 (see 2310190030), the same day Watson's declaration says she was diagnosed with COVID-19.
The Commerce Department has released the final results of the antidumping duty administrative review on low-melt polyester staple fiber from South Korea (A-580-895). Commerce set an AD rate of 3.59% for Toray Advanced Materials Korea, Inc., the only company under review. Subject merchandise from Toray entered Aug. 1, 2021, through July 31, 2022, will be liquidated at importer-specific rates. The 3.59% AD duty cash deposit rate for Toray, increased from the preliminary rate of 1.89%, takes effect Nov. 3, the date the final results will be published in the Federal Register.