Skip to content

#Vietnam

0 items today
Sep 4Fri
  1. CIT · Slip Opinions

    CIT sustains remand redetermination in Catfish Farmers of America v. United States

    The U.S. Court of International Trade sustained the Final Results of Redetermination pursuant to Court Remand (Apr. 15, 2026) in Catfish Farmers of America v. United States, Slip Op. 26-103, Court No. 24-00082, finding it complies with the court's order in Catfish Farmers of Am. v. United States, 49 CIT __, 815 Fed. Supp. 3d 1339 (2025), including its statement that the allegation identified a ministerial error. No party commented in opposition, and the United States asked the court to sustain the results. The court ordered that entries affected by this action be liquidated in accordance with the final court decision in this litigation.

  2. CIT · Slip Opinions

    CIT sustains ITC material-injury finding on subsidized shrimp from Vietnam

    The U.S. Court of International Trade sustained the International Trade Commission's affirmative material-injury determination in Slip Op. 26-107, Court No. 25-00032, rejecting the Shrimp Committee of the Vietnam Association of Seafood Exporters and Producers' challenge to the Commission's findings on underselling, the effects of imports and causation. The case is one of a trilogy challenging the Commission's finding that subsidized imports from Ecuador, India and Vietnam materially injured the domestic shrimp industry, with a period of investigation of January 1, 2021, to March 31, 2024. The court held the determination is supported by substantial evidence on the record.

May 11Mon
  1. CIT · Slip Opinions

    CIT denies motion to backdate statutory injunction in Vietnamese honey antidumping case

    The U.S. Court of International Trade denied a motion by Bao Nguyen Honeybee Co., Ltd. and eight other Vietnamese exporters to amend the statutory injunction in Court No. 25-00085 nunc pro tunc so that it would be effective as of August 8, 2025, the date they first moved for an injunction. The court held that the Federal Circuit's Agro Dutch exception does not apply because the liquidation at issue is alleged to have occurred before the injunction was entered, not during a post-entry grace period, and the plaintiff-intervenors did not show that the parties or the court intended the injunction to cover entries liquidated before it took effect.