CIT/Federal Circuit Litigation

Subscribe to CIT/Federal Circuit Litigation via RSS

Dominican Republic-based aluminum extrusions exporter, Kingtom Aluminio SRL (Kingtom) defended a decision issued by the Court of International Trade (CIT) to vacate a forced labor Finding against Kingtom issued by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). On October 31, 2025, Kingtom filed in opposition to the U.S. government’s motion for a reconsideration of the decision to…

The Court of International Trade (“CIT”) and the District Court for the District of Columbia (“DDC”) both issued decisions enjoining the Trump IEEPA tariffs.  In both venues, the government appealed the courts’ decisions, and both orders are currently stayed. The DDC stayed its own preliminary injunction pending appeal; the U.S. Court…

On May 28, 2025, the Court of International Trade granted summary judgment in V.O.S. Selections, Inc. et al v. Donald J. Trump Case No. 25-cv-66, ordering that all the executive orders imposing tariffs on the basis of IEEPA (Executive Order 14193, Executive Order 14194, Executive Order 14195, Executive Order 14257), were declared to be invalid…

On September 26, 2024, Texas-based syringe importer Retractable Technologies, Inc. (“Retractable”) filed a complaint before the United States Court of International Trade contesting the Office of the United States Trade Representative’s (USTR) 100 percent tariff rate on imported needles and syringes from China. The tariff increase became effective on September 27, 2024.  In conjunction with…

Last week, Hoshine Silicon Industry Co. (“Hoshine”) filed a complaint at the Court of International Trade contesting a withhold release order (“WRO”) issued against it by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”).

The withhold release order prohibits Hoshine and its subsidiaries from importing silica-based products into the United States due to allegations of forced labor…

On Monday, August 1st, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) filed remand results with the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT), releasing updated explanations for retaliatory tariffs on roughly $300 billion worth of Chinese goods imposed in the midst of the U.S. – China Trade War. USTR filed the remand as…

On August 24,2017, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) began a Section 301 investigation to determine whether acts, policies, and practices of the Government of China related to technology transfer, intellectual property, and innovation were actionable under the Trade Act of 1974. On March 22, 2018, USTR announced its affirmative findings and imposed…

On March 23, 2021, CIT Judge M. Miller Baker ruled largely in favor of Plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the agency record regarding concerns that labor cost data was compromised by forced labor. The Plaintiff, New American Keg, a domestic manufacturer that called on the U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC) to investigate keg imports in…

During a recent panel at Georgetown Law’s annual International Trade Update, two Federal Circuit judges urged trade attorneys to consider their audience and simplify their briefs. Although the U.S. Court of International Trade is specialized, Federal Circuit Judge Todd M. Hughes emphasized how the conversation must change when a trade matter is appealed to the…

The Court of International Trade (“CIT”) saw nearly 3,000 complaints filed over a period of four days from Friday, September 18, 2020 to Monday, September 22, 2020 challenging the United States Trade Representative’s (“USTR”) authority to levy Section 301 Tariffs on products found on List 3 (and frequently, also those also found on List 4A)…