The Court of International Trade on Oct. 2 sustained the Commerce Department's scope ruling made on remand excluding engines with horizontal crankshafts from the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on vertical shaft engines between 99cc and up to 225cc from China.

After oral argument, the U.S. asked the Court of International Trade to supplement its motion to dismiss in a case involving seized weight loss dietary supplements, saying that it had found emails from CBP “responsive to the Court’s questions" (UniChem Enterprises v. United States, CIT # 24-00033).

Importer Cozy Comfort on Oct. 1 said that the government is seeking to exclude evidence offered by the importer in its tariff classification case that the government itself is looking to enter into evidence. Cozy Comfort said the U.S. "cannot have it both ways," adding that the government's motion to exclude the evidence "is riddled with self-serving arguments, wasting the Court's time" (Cozy Comfort Co. v. United States, CIT # 22-00173).

DOJ and exporters led by Baroque clashed in oral argument Sept. 26 before Court of International Trade Judge Timothy Reif over whether the Commerce Department should look to broader, less specific datasets in calculating Tier 2 world benchmark prices or to smaller, narrower ones (Baroque Timber Industries (Zhongshan) Co. v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 22-00210).

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 U.S. on Sept. 30 told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that the Court of International Trade erred in rejecting its efforts to redact parts of the trade court's decision sustaining an International Trade Commission injury determination. The government said CIT "abused its discretion" in publicly disclosing information marked by the commission as business confidential (CVB, Inc. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 24-1504).

Importer 3BTech asked the Court of International Trade to award it attorney's fees in a tariff classification case associated with the company's efforts in resolving the issue of the government's untimely submission of expert declarations. 3BTech said the U.S. willfully violated its disclosure obligations and "blindsided both" the company and the court by not telling either about its plans to work on the declarations when it requested an extension to file its cross-motion for judgment (3BTech v. United States, CIT # 21-00026).

Texas-based syringe importer Retractable Technologies took to the Court of International Trade to contest the 100% increase of Section 301 tariffs recently imposed on needles and syringes from China. The complaint is seeking a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction against the duties, claiming that the tariffs could send the company out of business (Retractable Technologies v. United States, CIT # 24-00185).

The U.S. asked for a voluntary remand at the Court of International Trade in a suit on the 2021-22 review of the antidumping duty order on mechanical tubing of carbon and alloy steel from Italy to reconsider the "single-entity treatment" of exporters Dalmine and Silcotub (ArcelorMittal Tubular Products v. United States, CIT # 24-00039).

German paper exporter Koehler further defended its bid for an interlocutory appeal of the Court of International Trade's decision allowing the government to effect service on the company through its U.S. counsel (United States v. Koehler Oberkirch GmbH, CIT # 24-00014).