Careers

Diversity, Equity & Inclusion

Experience

Innovation

Interactive Maps

Locations

About

Pages

Meet our team of innovators
Ask us how we do it

Professionals

Insights

Services

Thompson Hine LLP, a full-service business law firm with approximately 400 lawyers in 11 offices, was ranked number 1 in the category “Most innovative North American law firms: New working models” by The Financial Times and was 1 of 7 firms shortlisted for The American Lawyer’s inaugural Legal Services Innovation Award. The firm has been recognized by the National Law Journal as a Legal Technology Trailblazer and featured by Bloomberg for its innovative service delivery models, which drive accuracy and predictability. The firm’s commitment to innovation is embodied in Thompson Hine SmartPaTHTM – a smarter way to work – predictable, efficient and aligned with client goals. For more information, please visit ThompsonHine.com and ThompsonHine.com/SmartPaTH.

Home | Thompson Hine LLP

Atlanta

Chicago

Cincinnati

Cleveland

Columbus

Dayton

Los Angeles

Minneapolis

New York

Silicon Valley

Washington, D.C.

<p>On April 23, 2021, the plaintiff group in the ongoing Section 301 tariff refund litigation at the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) filed a <a href="https://filehost.thompsonhine.com/uploads/April_23_Order_8bff.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Motion for Preliminary Injunction Limited to Suspension of Liquidation</a> of all unliquidated entries of imported products from China appearing on the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative&rsquo;s Lists 3 and 4A subject to tariffs pursuant to Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. The preliminary injunction motion in this litigation, which now involves more than 3,700 complaints challenging the legality of certain Section 301 duties, makes clear that the plaintiff group does not seek to enjoin or limit the collection of these Section 301 duties and that the U.S. government defendants will continue to collect the duties during the litigation. Instead, the plaintiffs seek injunctive relief to preserve the status quo as to liquidation until the CIT issues a final judgment.</p>
<p>The preliminary injunction motion states that &ldquo;[t]his motion should not have been necessary&rdquo; but must be filed because of the U.S. government defendants&rsquo; position that the CIT cannot order refunds on liquidated entries. If the CIT were to agree, then, the motion notes, &ldquo;the immediate need for a preliminary injunction to suspend liquidation is self-evident.&rdquo; If liquidated entries are ruled to be non-refundable, yet plaintiffs ultimately prevail in this matter, the harm would be the substantial loss of those paid duties found to be illegal. The motion argues that injunctive relief &ldquo;merely maintains the status quo to protect those sums from becoming irretrievably lost if the Section 301 tariffs are deemed unlawful but the refund remedy is deemed available only with respect to unliquidated entries.&rdquo; The motion also suggests that the CIT &ldquo;can and should reaffirm its broad remedial powers to issue refunds irrespective of liquidation status,&rdquo; referencing numerous U.S. Court of Appeals of the Federal Circuit and CIT precedents on this issue.</p>

core/freeform

SmarTrade

Senior Legislative and Regulatory Policy Advisor

Scott E. Diamond

International Trade

Plaintiff Group in China Section 301 Tariff Refund Litigation Seeks Preliminary Injunction on Liquidation of Lists 3 and 4A Entries