Three wildlife advocacy groups took to the Court of International Trade on Aug. 8 to contest the collective failure of the Commerce, Treasury and Homeland Security departments and the National Marine Fisheries Service to ban fish or fish products exported from fisheries that don't meet U.S. bycatch standards under the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) (Natural Resources Defense Council v. Gina Raimondo, CIT # 24-00148).

The U.S. said the Supreme Court's decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which eliminated the principle of deferring to federal agencies' interpretations of ambiguous statutes, "is not pertinent" to the massive lawsuit on the validity of the lists 3 and 4A Section 301 tariffs (HMTX Industries v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1891).

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Aug. 7 said the Commerce Department's use of only adverse facts available rates to set the rate for the non-individually examined respondents in antidumping proceedings, known as the "expected method," is not presumptively unreasonable. Judges Alan Lourie and Kara Stoll said instead that the "burden is on Commerce to justify a departure from the expected method, not to justify its use."

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 governments of Canada and Quebec, along with exporter Marmen Energy, vied for rehearing of a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decision sustaining the countervailability of a Canadian tax program. Filing for full court or en banc rehearing of the decision, the Canadian government said the court allowed the Commerce Department to ignore "economic reality" and elevated "form over substance" (The Government of Quebec v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 22-1807)

The Court of International Trade earlier this month heard oral argument on whether a CBP protest denial effectively revoked a prior CBP protest decision by applying a different tariff classification to identical merchandise, and should have been subject to a notice-and-comment period (Under the Weather v. U.S., CIT # 21-00211).

After its bid for a preliminary injunction was denied by Court of International Trade Judge Claire Kelly (see 2407260045), a customs broker fought Aug. 5 against a motion to dismiss its case, saying its complaint was ripe for litigation because CBP had already made the decision to deny its reinstatement to the agency's Entry Type 86 pilot (Seko Customs Brokerage v. United States, CIT # 24-00097).

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit last week affirmed the convictions of six companies for conspiracy to commit wire fraud, customs fraud and promotional money laundering. However, the court said the trial court failed to resolve the parties' dispute on the value of the companies' warehouses before finding that they "lacked the ability to pay" the over $1.8 billion judgment and "ordering a nominal payment schedule."

Importer King Maker Marketing told the Court of International Trade on Aug. 2 that the date of importation of its paper-wrapped cigarettes was the date on which the goods were withdrawn from a foreign-trade zone and not the date on which they entered the FTZ. As such, the company said in a complaint that its duty drawback claims weren't untimely, since they were filed within five years of the dates on which the goods were withdrawn from the FTZ (King Maker Marketing v. United States, CIT # 24-00134).

The Commerce Department on Aug. 2 said Vietnam will continue to be treated as a non-market economy in antidumping duty proceedings. Releasing the results of its review of the nation's market status, the agency said that despite "substantive reforms made over the past 20 years, the extensive government involvement in Vietnam’s economy distorts Vietnamese prices and costs," rendering them "unusable" for calculating the duties.