The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its mandate Sept. 22 in Royal Brush Manufacturing v. U.S. The appellate court ruled in July that CBP violated importer Royal Brush's due process rights during an Enforce and Protect Act investigation by not providing the company with access to business confidential information (see 2307270038). The ruling has raised questions on how CBP would respond and how it will conduct its antidumping and countervailing duty evasion investigations in the future. Royal Brush counsel Steven Gordon emailed that the U.S. hasn't petitioned for a rehearing and that he doesn't expect an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court (Royal Brush Manufacturing v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 22-1226).
The Commerce Department legally held that modified engines with a gearbox and vertical power take-off shaft are covered by the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on vertical shaft engines between 99cc and 255cc from China, the U.S. said in a Sept. 19 reply brief at the Court of International Trade (Zhejiang Amerisun Technology Co. v. U.S., CIT # 23-00011).
CBP's Office of Regulations and Rulings wrongly overturned an evasion finding against Dominican company Kingtom Aluminio by CBP's Trade Remedy and Law Enforcement Directorate, the Aluminum Extrusions Fair Trade Committee (AEFTC) said in its Sept. 20 reply brief at the Court of Intenrational Trade (Aluminum Extrusions Fair Trade Committee v. U.S., CIT # 22-00236).
Actuators used in automotive applications that were produced in Mexico from Chinese, Mexican, U.S. and Taiwanese components are correctly Mexican origin and shouldn't have been assessed Section 301 tariffs, importer Suprajit said in a Sept. 22 complaint at the Court of International Trade (Suprajit Controls v. U.S., CIT # 23-00181).
The Commerce Department correctly found on remand that importer Valeo North America's T-series aluminum sheet fell within the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on aluminum sheet from China, DOJ said in its Sept. 20 comments in support of the remand redetermination (Valeo North America v. U.S., CIT # 21-00581).
The Commerce Department erred on remand when it stuck by its benchmark picks for the land program and the aluminum plate, sheet and strip program in a lawsuit on the 2016-17 administrative review of the countervailing duty order on aluminum foil from China, Chinese aluminum exporter Zhongji said in its Sept. 18 remand comments to the Court of International Trade (Jiangsu Zhongji Lamination Materials Co. v. U.S., CIT # 21-00133).
The Commerce Department mistakenly relied on the invoice dates rather than contract dates as dates of U.S. sales, resulting in a miscalculation of duties in the 2020-2021 antidumping duty review on steel concrete reinforcing bar from Turkey, Turkish rebar exporters Kaptan and Colakoglu said in a Sept. 18 brief at the Court of International Trade. The brief came in support of a motion for judgment, which asked the court to remand the case to Commerce for reconsideration of the date of sale for U.S. sales and recalculation of the antidumping rates (Kaptan Demir Celik Endustrisi Ve Ticaret v. U.S., CIT # 23-00059).
The Court of International Trade in a Sept. 20 opinion dismissed a customs penalty case involving surety company Lincoln General Insurance Co. The company filed a joint motion to dismiss with the U.S. in the case, as well as in 10 other similar matters, telling the court that the parties reached an understanding regarding "priority classification that enabled [CBP] to request that the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania approve the United States' claim" as "undisputed and resolved" (see 2309200038). Judge Jane Restani granted the motion to dismiss.
The Commerce Department lawfully selected surrogate values, calculated rates, applied adverse facts, and correctly decided to deny a separate rate to exporter Trina during the eighth administrative review of the antidumping duty order on crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells from China, the American Alliance for Solar Manufacturing said in its Sept. 18 brief at the Court of International Trade (Jinko Solar Import and Export Co. v. U.S., CIT # 22-00219).
The U.S. and Lincoln General Insurance Co. both moved to dismiss 11 different customs penalty claims concerning various single transaction bonds the company entered into with importer Aftahour. The consent motion to dismiss the lawsuits said that "the parties reached an understanding regarding priority classification that enabled [CBP] to request that the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania approve the United States' claim" as "undisputed and resolved." As a result, the U.S. "distributed the assets of Lincoln."