The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:

The International Trade Commission did not properly investigate the actual feasibility or frequency of reshipping excess phosphate fertilizer during a year in which fertilizer supply chains were rocked by unusual events, foreign exporters and domestic importers told the Court of International Trade May 8 in comments opposing a continued affirmative injury finding by the ITC after a remand (OCP v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 21-00219).

An exporter of frozen fish fillets from Vietnam brought a case to court contesting the 2021-2022 antidumping review on its products. In its complaint, it said the Commerce Department had wrongly denied it byproduct offsets for “fresh broken meat” and “fresh fish waste by-products” and illegally liquidated some of its entries at the “punitive” Vietnam-wide rate instead of its own, lower, separate rate (Can Tho Import Export Seafood Joint Stock Company v. U.S., CIT # 24-00080).

Tire exporters YC Rubber Co. and Sutong Tire Resources alerted the Court of International Trade to a separate CIT decision affirming the Commerce Department's finding that the mandatory respondent in an antidumping duty review remained eligible for a separate rate "despite its unwilligness to participate in the administrative review" (YC Rubber Co. (North America) v. United States, CIT # 19-00069).

The U.S. on May 13 moved to dismiss a lawsuit challenging CBP's exclusion of two rubber tire entries, claiming that CIT has no jurisdiction because the entries were excluded at the behest of the Transportation Department's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). As a result, the exclusions were not protestable decisions made by CBP, so the Court of International Trade had no subject matter jurisdiction under Section 1581(a) (Inspired Ventures v. United States, CIT # 24-00062).

Conservation groups Sea Shepherd New Zealand and Sea Shepherd Conservation Society asked the Court of International Trade on May 10 for another 30 days to settle the final issues in a case ultimately seeking an import ban on certain types of fish from New Zealand. The conservation groups said they sent the U.S. an offer to settle the matter of the groups' "claim for fees and costs in this case," and that DOJ is reviewing the offer under the agency's regulations (Sea Shepherd New Zealand v. United States, CIT # 20-00112).

DOJ accidentally included confidential business and personal information for unrelated cases in an October filing due to a glitch in CBP's Automated Commercial Environment (ACE), the agency said May 10 in a letter to the Court of International Trade (Suprajit Controls v. U.S., CIT # 23-00181).

The Court of International Trade on May 13 entered default judgment against Chinese exporter Cherish Your Health Food Inc. in a customs penalty case. The U.S. brought the suit in October 2023 claiming that the company hadn't paid antidumping duties on five fresh garlic entries imported in 2018-20 (United States v. Cherish Your Health Food, CIT # 23-00230).

The U.S. moved for a voluntary remand at the Court of International Trade to reconsider its decision to reject importer LE Commodities' requests for exclusions from Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs. The government said it will "ensure that it appropriately addresses the record evidence" on remand. LE Commodities assented to the remand bid (LE Commodities v. United States, CIT # 23-00220).

Even if the public can deduce some trends or information about a company's confidential product information from publicly available sources, that doesn't "negate the confidential nature of the information submitted" as part of an International Trade Commission investigation, the ITC told the Court of International Trade on May 8 (OCP v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 21-00219).