The fur industry has been in crisis since the death of fur supplier Joe Furgan in 2009, which forced the industry to rely heavily on imported animal carcasses for their supply.

That has led to fur farmers and processors to use cheaper and often more dangerous methods to keep the fur supply in line.

Fox Fur Processing is a subsidiary of the American Fur Products Association (AFPA), a trade association representing the fur industry, which has also filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, alleging that the administration’s rules on importation and export of fur products violate the trade laws of the United States.

Fox fur processing is now one of the few fur processors that continues to rely on imported animals, a practice that has been dubbed “factory farming.”

Fox Fur processing is the largest producer of fur in the United Sates, but it is not the only one, and it is now the subject of a new lawsuit.

Fox Fur Processors filed a new federal lawsuit Monday, claiming that the Trump Administration’s proposed rules to regulate fur processing are unconstitutional and that the proposed regulations will harm the animal industry and its farmers.

Fox is asking the court to strike down the proposed rules and hold the Trump Department of Agriculture in contempt.

The lawsuit alleges that the regulations are “unconstitutional because they impose arbitrary and capricious regulatory burdens and are likely to create undue hardship for producers and processors of fur, as well as for the American public.”

Fox is also seeking to hold the administration in contempt for violating the Animal Welfare Act and the Trade Act.

The Trump administration is expected to announce a rule soon on how to classify fur as “domestic” and exempt it from certain trade restrictions.

The proposed rules, which have been in the works for a year, would require fur producers to keep at least 10 percent of their animal products from being exported, with the rest being exported to the United Kingdom.

Currently, fur is only exported to Britain, and most of the fur that is imported to the U.S. is imported into the country from Europe.

Fox filed a similar lawsuit in 2016, arguing that the new rules are too restrictive and would hurt the American industry.

In December of last year, the Department of Commerce announced that it would revise the rules.

Fox has also argued that the rules would hurt its business.

In the lawsuit, Fox argues that the regulation would create an unfair competitive advantage for its fur products, as it would make it more difficult for fur producers and manufacturers to compete with companies like the UBS, which it has partnered with to supply fur to U.K. fur buyers.

It also argues that any changes to the regulations would “unfairly” favor the fur business over the rest of the industry.

The Department of Labor also issued a report last year saying that the federal regulations would lead to a $5.3 billion increase in the U., S., and Pensions tax burden, with fur producers, processors, and manufacturers taking a larger share of the tax burden.

Fox’s lawsuit argues that there is already an undue burden on the fur product industry.

Fox claims that the animal agriculture industry is already burdened by federal regulation, and that it should be exempt from the new regulations.

Fox also claims that it already receives $12.3 million in tax breaks from the UWS every year.

“Fur producers and retailers already face an unfair burden from the Department’s rules, and the Trump regulations will make it even more so,” the company’s attorneys wrote in their court filing.

“We believe the administration has acted unlawfully and unconstitutionally in trying to enforce its regulations.”