In Husch Blackwell’s August 2024 Trade Law Update you’ll learn about the following updates in international trade and supply chain law:
Should you have
The Department of Homeland Security announced on December 8, 2023 that it is adding three entities to the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (“UFLPA”) Entity List, the consolidated register of four lists required by section 2(d)(2)(B)(ii) of the UFLPA. The UFLPA and its Entity List are explained in more detail in a prior post.
In a September 6, 2023 opinion issued by Judge M. Miller Baker in three cases brought under the Court’s residual jurisdiction provision, 28 U.S.C. § 1581(i), the U.S. Court of International Trade (“CIT”) held that reliquidation is available as a remedy in Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) cases. At least in the short term, this decision creates
In Husch Blackwell’s July 2023 Trade Law Update you’ll learn about the following updates in international trade and supply chain law:
Should you have
Judge Stephen Alexander Vaden of the Court of International Trade (“CIT”) issued an order on June 8, 2023 to address increasing concerns related to the use of generative artificial intelligence platforms in drafting documents that are publicly filed in the litigation process. The order reflects a growing awareness of the novel risks associated with using
In Husch Blackwell’s April and May 2023 Trade Law Update you’ll learn about the following updates in international trade and supply chain law:
In Husch Blackwell’s November 2022 Trade Law Update you’ll learn about the following updates in international trade and supply chain law:
On September 8, 2021, after a longstanding dispute, the US Court of International Trade issued an order resolving the steps that Plaintiffs will need to take in order to preserve their rights to receive refunds, in conformance with the injunction that was issued by the court on July 6, 2021. The Government recently conceded that, as a practical matter, it does not have the resources to suspend liquidation on an ongoing basis to comply with the Court’s PI order. As a result, in lieu of suspension, the Government stipulated that it will rely on post-judgment reliquidation or refunds to provide the remedy in the event Plaintiffs’ claims are successful – the very solution that Plaintiffs had been advocating for since the entry of the PI order. As a result, the Court issued the attached Order lifting the PI and TRO and removing the requirement for a CBP repository. Customs will continue liquidating entries in the ordinary course as they have done.
On December 11, 2020, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), through the U.S. Department of Justice, filed a civil action in the U.S. Court of International Trade (“CIT”) in New York, United States v. Winland International, Inc. et al. The government alleges false statement to avoid paying the correct antidumping (“AD”) rates and instead declaring inappropriate combination rates apply, as well as undervaluation of the goods, certain types of tires. Fourteen individuals, as well as the company are named in the civil case at the CIT. The press release of the U.S. Department of Justice states that the alleged violations total at least $6.5 million in lost import duty deposits.
The U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) will not stay its order (Ct. No. 19-00009) instructing U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to refund importers’ Section 232 tariffs on steel from Turkey. A three-judge panel denied the government’s motion to stay while also denying the Plaintiffs’ motion to enforce judgement. The CIT found that the