This Week in Trade | 8/8 - 8/12

Here are the latest updates in trade, straight from the ITC Federal Register, from August 8, 2022 to August 12, 2022.

Summary from the ITC: “Notice is hereby given that a complaint was filed with the U.S. International Trade Commission on July 1, 2022, under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, on behalf of VideoLabs, Inc. of Palo Alto, California. A supplement to the complaint was filed on July 21, 2022. The complaint, as supplemented, alleges violations of section 337 based upon the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain video processing devices and products containing the same by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,769,238 (“the '238 Patent”), U.S. Patent No. 8,139,878 (“the '878 Patent”), U.S. Patent No. 8,208,542 (“the '542 Patent”), and U.S. Patent No. 7,372,452 (“the '452 Patent”). The complaint further alleges that an industry in the United States exists, or is in the process of being established, as required by the applicable Federal Statute. The complainant requests that the Commission institute an investigation and, after the investigation, issue a limited exclusion order and cease and desist orders.”

Determinations from the ITC: “On the basis of the record [1] developed in the subject five-year reviews, the United States International Trade Commission (“Commission”) determines, pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (“the Act”), that revocation of the countervailing duty orders on corrosion-resistant steel products from China, India, Italy, and South Korea and the antidumping duty orders on corrosion-resistant steel products from China, India, Italy, South Korea, and Taiwan would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time.”

Summary from the ITC: “In accordance with the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement Implementation Act (“USMCA Implementation Act”) the U.S. International Trade Commission (Commission) instituted Investigation No. 332-592, USMCA Automotive Rules of Origin: Economic Impact and Operations, 2023 Report.”

Summary from the ITC: “Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined not to review an initial determination (“ID”) (Order No. 24) of the presiding administrative law judge (“ALJ”), terminating the investigation based on settlement. The investigation is terminated.”

Summary from the ITC: “Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission (the “Commission”) has determined not to review an initial determination (“ID”) (Order No. 23) issued by the presiding administrative law judge (“ALJ”) terminating the investigation with respect to Juno Athletics LLC (“Juno”), the last active respondent, based on settlement. Juno is hereby terminated from this investigation. The Commission requests written submissions from the parties, interested government agencies, and interested persons on issues of remedy, bonding, and the public interest with respect to the respondent found in default.”

Summary from the ITC: “Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined not to review an initial determination (“ID”) (Order No. 23) of the presiding administrative law judge (“ALJ”), granting a joint motion to terminate the investigation in its entirety based on settlement. The investigation is terminated.”

Determinations from the ITC: “On the basis of the record [1] developed in the subject investigations, the United States International Trade Commission (“Commission”) determines, pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (“the Act”), that an industry in the United States is not materially injured or threatened with material injury by reason of imports of urea ammonium nitrate solutions from Russia and Trinidad and Tobago, provided for in subheading 3102.80.00 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, that have been found by the U.S. Department of Commerce (“Commerce”) to be subsidized by the governments of Russia and Trinidad and Tobago and to be sold in the United States at less than fair value (“LTFV”).[2]”

Summary from the ITC: “Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission (“Commission”) has determined not to review an initial determination (“ID”) (Order No. 15) of the presiding chief administrative law judge (“CALJ”), terminating the investigation for good cause. The investigation is terminated.”

Summary from the ITC: “Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission (“Commission”) has determined not to review an initial determination (“ID”) (Order No. 12) of the presiding administrative law judge (“ALJ”), terminating the investigation based on a settlement agreement.”

Summary from the ITC: “Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission (“Commission”) has determined not to review an initial determination (“ID”) (Order No. 20) of the presiding administrative law judge (“ALJ”), amending the notice of investigation to properly reflect respondent Rexford Management, LLC's (“Rexford”) name and then terminating the investigation as to Rexford based on withdrawal of the complaint.”

Summary from the ITC: “Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission (“Commission”) has determined not to review an initial determination (“ID”) (Order No. 14) issued by the presiding administrative law judge (“ALJ”) terminating the above-captioned investigation based on a settlement agreement. The investigation is hereby terminated.”

Summary from the ITC: “Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has received a complaint entitled Certain Pillows and Seat Cushions, Components Thereof, and Packaging Thereof, DN 3633; the Commission is soliciting comments on any public interest issues raised by the complaint or complainant's filing pursuant to the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure.”

Determinations from the ITC: “On the basis of the record [1] developed in the subject five-year reviews, the United States International Trade Commission (“Commission”) determines, pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (“the Act”), that revocation of the countervailing duty orders on cold-rolled steel flat products (“cold-rolled steel”) from China, India, and South Korea and the antidumping duty orders on cold-rolled steel from China, India, Japan, South Korea, and the United Kingdom would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time. The Commission further determines that revocation of the countervailing and antidumping duty orders on cold-rolled steel from Brazil would not be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time.[2]”

Determinations from the ITC: “On the basis of the record [1] developed in the subject five-year reviews, the United States International Trade Commission (“Commission”) determines, pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (“the Act”), that revocation of the antidumping duty orders on certain polyester staple fiber from South Korea and Taiwan would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time.”

Summary from the ITC: “Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined to institute a modification proceeding in the above-captioned investigation.”

At Export Portal, we believe in giving our users everything they need to trade online with confidence. Subscribe to our newsletter today to stay informed!