Importer PrimeSource Building Products told the Supreme Court on Nov. 20 that it's preserving its right to qualify for any relief the court may grant exporter Oman Fasteners in the company's case against President Donald Trump's expansion of Section 232 steel and aluminum duties onto "derivative" products. PrimeSource sent the letter to the court after its petition for certiorari was denied by the high court on Oct. 30 (see 2310300020). Despite this decision from the Supreme Court, Oman Fasteners pressed on in its bid for the court to take up its case in a separate action challenging the expansion of the duties (see 2311010052). Oman Fasteners argued against the "extreme deference doctrine" exhibited by the appellate court that "contradicts the statutory text and does violence to the separation of powers" (Oman Fasteners v. United States, Sup. Ct. # 23-432).
The Court of International Trade in a confidential Nov. 21 opinion remanded parts and sustained parts of the Commerce Department's remand results in a case on the antidumping duty investigation on biodiesel from Indonesia. In a letter to litigants, Judge Richard Eaton gave the parties until Nov. 30 to review the confidential information in the opinion, stating it's the court's intention to release a public version of the opinion "in the near future." In a previous opinion in the case, the court remanded Commerce's reliance on constructed value for sales not made through Indonesia's Public Service Obligation,saying it needed to be further explained (see 2207050064). The court also told Commerce to further explain its legal authority to make a CV adjustment to account for Renewable Identification Numbers (Wilmar Trading Pte Ltd. v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 18-00121).
The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Importer Valeo North America will appeal a Nov. 8 Court of International Trade decision sustaining the Commerce Department's scope ruling that the company's T-series aluminum sheet is covered by the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on common alloy aluminum sheet from China. In the decision, the trade court upheld Commerce's consideration of and weight applied to various industry evidence along with its detailed discussion of heat treatment (see 2311090034). According to the notice of appeal, Valeo will take the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Valeo North America v. United States, CIT # 21-00581).
The U.S. added two attorneys to its litigation team in the massive Section 301 case at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Filing an amended notice of appearance on Nov. 20, the government tacked on Melissa Patterson and Joshua Koppel -- two attorneys in DOJ's Civil Appellate Division -- to the appellee team for the U.S. (HMTX Industries v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1891).
The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The scope of the antidumping duty order on carbon steel butt-weld pipe fittings from China "unambiguously" applies to pipe fittings "in finished and unfinished form," AD petitioners Tube Forgings of America and Mills Iron Works argued in a Nov. 16 complaint at the Court of International Trade. Commerce's determination "eviscerates" the order's remedial effect by interpreting the term "unfinished form" to mean "create subcategories of pipe fittings in unfinished form," then saying these subcategories excluded certain pipe fittings in unfinished form, the brief said (Tube Forgings of America v. U.S., CIT # 23-00236).
The Commerce Department cannot make the contradictory finding that the process of assembly or completion of solar cells in Cambodia was insignificant, while simultaneously saying these processes, involving the formation of a positive-negative junction on a polysilicon wafer, give the solar cells their essential character, exporter BYD HK Co. said in a Nov. 16 complaint at the Court of International Trade (BYD (H.K.) Co. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00221).
The Court of International Trade agreed to dismiss importer Strato's customs suit on the classification of the company's parts of railway or tramway locomotives or rolling stock, hooks and other coupling devices, buffer and parts thereof. Strato filed the suit to claim that its goods were substantially transformed and thus should not be hit with Section 301 duties. The U.S. agreed with the dismissal of the action but no reason was provided for why the suit was ditched (Strato v. United States, CIT # 23-00142).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit gave exporter SeAH Steel Corp. more time to file its reply brief in the lead case on the Commerce Department's use of the Cohen's d test when rooting out "masked" dumping. The exporter now has until Jan. 8, 2024, to file its brief (Stupp Corp. v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 23-1663).