Photo of Nithya Nagarajan

Nithya Nagarajan

Nithya’s extensive background in U.S. trade issues spans 25 years and includes various roles in a number of federal government agencies, including the Department of Commerce Department of Justice, and the U.S. Court of International Trade. She assists clients with administrative and regulatory actions before the Department of Commerce, International Trade Commission and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and defends clients in appeals before the Court of International Trade, Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, NAFTA panels and the World Trade Organization. In addition to her body of U.S. experience, Nithya is also well-versed in international trade issues in China and India.

[APRIL 3 UPDATE] U.S. lawmakers of both parties in the House and the Senate, including House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) and Sens. Pat Toomey (R-PA) and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), have urged the Trump Administration to suspend tariff collections for at least 90 days to assist businesses that are hurting from the economic crisis caused

On Monday, March 30, 2020, trade ministers of the G20 countries issued a joint statement stating that any emergency measures taken in response to the coronavirus pandemic must be temporary and consistent with World Trade Organization (WTO) rules.  Several governments, including India and Germany, have already implemented export restrictions on medical supplies, and there are

UPDATED: April 1, 2020 – Several U.S. executive branch agencies along with federal courts are instituting significant operational changes.  These changes have either already been implemented or are anticipated at the U.S. government agencies and courts which manage international trade-related concerns in the coming weeks due to personnel and public safety concerns over the COVID-19

The Court of International Trade (CIT) issued a decision in TR International Trading Co. v. United States (Slip Op. 20-34) on March 16, 2020, stating that if a company wishes to file an appeal under the Court’s residual jurisdiction under 19 U.S.C. §1581(i), then it must first ensure that it has either filed

UPDATED: March 25, 2020 – Several U.S. executive branch agencies along with federal courts are instituting significant operational changes.  These changes have either already been implemented or are anticipated at the U.S. government agencies and courts which manage international trade-related concerns in the coming weeks due to personnel and public safety concerns over the COVID-19

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) recently announced two new final determinations that importers of garlic and pipe fittings were evading antidumping and countervailing duties, under the Enforce and Protect Act (“EAPA”).

Title IV, Section 421 of the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015 is commonly referred to as The Enforce and Protect

The Court of International Trade on Thursday, March 12, 2020, reassigned several pending appeals on the recent challenges to the Section 232 derivative tariffs on steel on aluminum.  These duties were originally announced on January 24, 2020, and went into effect on February 8, 2020.  (See original post here).  While it is unusual for

In Husch Blackwell’s February 2020 Trade Law Newsletter, you’ll learn about the following updates in international trade and supply chain law:

  • USTR announces increase in Section 301 tariffs for aircraft
  • Section 232 derivative product tariffs
  • Commerce initiates an AD investigation on imports of difluoromethane (R-32) from China
  • India removed from U.S. list of developing

On February 28, 2020, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Court of International Trade’s decision that found the institution of Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum were not an unconstitutional delegation of authority by Congress to the President under Supreme Court precedent.  This appeal addressed the basic steel and aluminum