The Court of International Trade in a June 9 opinion denied Indian exporter Gujarat Fluorochemicals Limited's bid for injunctive relief against paying cash deposits from a countervailing duty investigation and liquidation. Judge Timothy Stanceu ruled that the plaintiff failed to show that it would likely face harm without the preliminary injunction since the company did not show that future refunds of excess cash deposits would be an "inadequate remedy." As for the injunction on liquidation, the court said that there's no draft order in "satisfactory form" which could allow the court to issue the standard injunction against liquidation. However, Stanceu gave the plaintiff 30 days to renew the injunction bid.

The Court of International Trade in a June 1 opinion made public June 9 granted the U.S.' motion to dismiss a case seeking Section 232 steel and aluminum tariff exclusions brought by exporter Borusan Mannesmann and importer Gulf Coast Express Pipeline. Judge Timothy Reif said that the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction since the subject entries are unliquidated. The court ruled that the plaintiffs failed to show that CBP's decision not to issue refunds before liquidation constitutes a protestable decision.

In a series of three opinions, the Court of International Trade denied domestic honey, crawfish, garlic and mushroom producers' bids for reconsideration of the court's past ruling dismissing some of their claims as time-barred by the statute of limitations. The cases, led by Adee Honey Farms, Hilex Poly and American Drew, sought court orders to get CBP to distribute delinquency interest that should be paid to affected domestic producers under the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act of 2000. Previously, Judge Timothy Stanceu said that the only timely claims were the ones relating to the application of the Final Rule to the plaintiffs' individual CDSOA distributions happening in the two years before their implementing their actions. In the June 8 opinions, Stanceu held that no "valid reason" was put forth as to why the court should vacate or modify the decisions to dismiss the untimely claims.

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a June 7 order granted Porsche Motorsports North America'as motion to voluntarily dismiss its lawsuit seeking duty-free treatment of auto parts temporarily exported then reimported. The Court of International Trade previously denied Porsche the treatment, ruling that auto parts exported to Canada for use at auto races then re-imported don't qualify for duty-free treatment under a U.S. goods returned tariff provision for "tools of the trade." The trade court found that the auto parts and tools were exported to generate sales to race teams rather than for a professional purpose, as required under subheading 9801.00.8500.

The Court of International Trade in a June 6 opinion dismissed customs broker license exam test taker Byungmin Chae's case contesting five questions on his broker exam. Judge Timothy Reif said that CBP was right to dismiss Chae's appeal for four of the contested questions but that the agency was wrong to dismiss the fifth appeal. However, the court's move to grant credit on this one question was not enough to get Chae over the 75% threshold needed to pass the test.

President Joe Biden announced on June 6 a 24-month grace period during which solar cells from Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam may be imported free from antidumping and countervailing duties, regardless of the results of an ongoing anti-circumvention inquiry being carried out by the Commerce Department.

The Court of International Trade in two May 26 orders sustained the Commerce Department's remand results in an antidumping case and a countervailing duty case, both brought by Turkish exporter Celik Halat. The cases contested the Commerce Department's decision to reject minutes-late submissions. Following a remand, the agency accepted the submissions, resulting in lowered AD/CVD rates for Celik Halat and the ultimate acceptance of the remand by the trade court.

The Court of International Trade in a May 26 order denied the U.S.' motion for a stay in an antidumping case. The case, brought by exporter Building Systems de Mexico, contests the less-than-fair-value investigation into fabricated structural steel from Mexico. The U.S. requested a stay until the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issues a decision in an appeal of the International Trade Commission's negative injury determination on the steel from China. Judge Claire Kelly said that "a stay is not appropriate in this case" since BSM could be harmed by a stay order. The exporter has already successfully challenged four of the Commerce Department's bases for finding dumping, and a stay would "significantly devalue" its investment in challenging the finding of dumping needed for an AD order, she said.

The Court of International Trade in a May 19 opinion made public May 27 sent back the Commerce Department's use of adverse facts available over alleged subsidies stemming from China's Export Buyer's Credit Program in a countervailing duty investigation. Judge Richard Eaton said that not enough evidence backs Commerce's use of AFA to find that the plaintiffs, led by Zhejiang Junyue Standard Part Co., benefitted from the EBCP. In the investigation, Commerce also tripled the subsidy rate for the program to account for benefits received by Junyue and two of its affiliates. Eaton remanded this as well, finding that this move "has not been explained adequately."

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a May 24 opinion sent back the Commerce Department's final results of an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on large power transformers from South Korea. Judges Pauline Newman, Alan Lourie and Timothy Dyk remanded Commerce's use of adverse facts available, ruling that respondent Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. has the statutory right to correct the deficiencies in the record on service-related revenue that led to the use of adverse inferences and partial facts available.