The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative stuck by its decision not to reinstate a Section 301 China tariff exclusion for drinking water cooler products, the agency said in Dec. 14 remand results submitted to the Court of International Trade. USTR said that while the availability of these goods from places outside of China is limited, the record shows that sources outside of China have picked up since 2018 with third-country imports growing "significantly in the first six months after the exclusion expired." While these sources, along with domestic production, fail to meet domestic demand, the record does not show that the additional duties are "impacting or resulting in severe economic harm to U.S. companies or other interests" (DS Services of America v. United States, CIT #22-00157).
The Court of International Trade on Dec. 15 dismissed a case seeking the release of goods excluded over forced labor concerns without plaintiff Virtus Nutrition's proposed condition that CBP allow the goods to be reexported. Judge Timothy Reif said the temporary storage agreement under which the goods are currently being held does not give a basis to include the proposed stipulation. Virtus "retains recourse" to address its concern that CBP can seize the goods rather than allow their exportation, Reif said.
The Commerce Department’s recent preliminary determination that Southeast Asian solar cells and panels are circumventing antidumping and countervailing duties (see 2212020064) left several questions unanswered, and lawyers for the Solar Energy Industries Association hope the agency will clarify these issues as the case proceeds to its final determinations, they said during a webinar Dec. 13.
The Court of International Trade should reject a request to temporarily stay an order barring the import of certain fish taken from New Zealand's West Coast North Island multispecies set-net and trawl fisheries, plaintiffs Sea Shepherd New Zealand and Sea Shepherd Conservation Society argued in a Dec. 12 reply brief. Harms the New Zealand fisheries will purportedly suffer absent a stay are "short-lived, overstated, and speculative," the brief said, but "[m]ore importantly, they pale in comparison to the ongoing risk posed to the Maui dolphin from set net and trawl fisheries that operate within the dolphins' range" (Sea Shepherd New Zealand v. United States, CIT #20-00112).
The U.S. Department of the Interior unreasonably delayed responding to a 2014 request to certify Mexico under the Pelly Amendments to the Fishermen's Protective Act of 1967 due to Mexico's failure to stop illegal fishing of and trade in endangered totoaba, an "imperiled fish," the Center for Biological Diversity, Animal Welfare Institute and Natural Resources Defense Council argued. In a suit filed Dec. 14 at the Court of International Trade, the conservation groups said the department and Interior Secretary Deb Haaland violated the Administrative Procedure Act by failing to respond to the petition, and said the killing of the totoaba is aiding in the "imminent extinction of the vaquita porpoise" (Center for Biological Diversity v. Deb Haaland, CIT #22-00339).
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.
Correction: In its preliminary determinations in anti-circumvention inquiries on solar cells from Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam, Commerce declared the 22 companies that did not cooperate with the inquiries are ineligible for certification processes for goods from exempt exporters and goods that don’t meet Chinese content requirements. However, they may submit certifications that their goods are “applicable” entries that qualify for a two-year grace period from any duties imposed under the anti-circumvention inquiries (see 2212020064 and 2212070025). Such certifications are due by Jan. 23 for entries since April 1, 2022, and at time of entry summary for entries on or after Dec. 23.
The Court of International Trade should dismiss a Section 592 penalty case against defendant Zhe "John" Liu since the statute of limitations has run out and the "action is untimely," Liu said in a Dec. 13 motion. The fraud case brought by the U.S. was not brought within five years from the date of the alleged violation because the defendant was not involved in the transaction at issue, as he was neither an owner, officer or director of GL Paper Distribution -- the company that committed the alleged fraud and a co-defendant in the action, the brief said. Liu also argued that the U.S. failed to state a claim against the defendant. As a result, Liu should be severed and dismissed from the case, the brief said (United States v. Zhe "John" Liu, CIT #22-00215).
Although some observers thought the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative's reaction to losing cases filed by Norway, Switzerland, Turkey and China at the World Trade Organization over its steel and aluminum tariffs marked a new era of rejecting the rules-based trading system, others who had served either in the WTO or the U.S. government said there was nothing too surprising about the U.S. reaction to its loss.
The Court of International Trade in a Dec.12 opinion dismissed a suit from importer MS Solar Investments challenging the Commerce Department's liquidation instructions following an antidumping duty review for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves said the case is based on an error affecting the final results of the review and not a mistake in the liquidation instructions. This means the case falls under Section 1581(c) and not Section 1581(i) -- the court's "residual" jurisidiction -- as claimed by the plaintiff.