The scope of the U.S. government's remand request in an Enforce and Protect Act case in light of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's ruling in Royal Brush Manufacturing v. U.S. is "not appropriate," plaintiffs led by Newtrend USA Co. said in a Sept. 18 reply brief. The government didn't say whether on remand it will put on the record "the exculpatory documents that Plaintiffs" gave to CBP during verification that the agency "refused to allow in the original proceeding," nor did it say whether it would allow additional briefing on those materials, the brief said (Newtrend USA Co. v. United States, CIT # 22-00347).
The Commerce Department shifted to entirely relying on adverse facts available rates for antidumping duty respondent Saffron Living Co. on remand in a case on the AD investigation on mattresses from Thailand. The result is a 763.28% margin for Saffron and a 572.66% mark for all-other exporters, up considerably from 37.48% prior to the remand (Brooklyn Bedding v. United States, CIT # 21-00285).
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Commerce Department lawfully selected surrogate values, calculated rates, applied adverse facts, and correctly decided to deny a separate rate to Trina during its eighth administrative review of the antidumping duty order on crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells from China, DOJ told the Court of International Trade in a Sept. 18 reply (Jinko Solar Import and Export Co. v. U.S., CIT # 22-00219).
Exporters Carbon Activated Tianjin Co. and Carbon Activated Corp. will appeal a July Court of International Trade decision upholding the Commerce Department's surrogate value picks for five inputs in an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on activated carbon from China (see 2307240049). The five inputs are carbonized material, coal tar, hydrochloric acid, steam and bituminous coal. Per the notice of appeal, the exporters will take the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In the opinion, the trade court also sustained the valuation of ocean freight costs, calculation of surrogate financial ratios and acceptance of respondent Datong Juqiang Activated Carbon Co.'s reporting of its bituminous coal consumption (Carbon Activated Tianjin Co. v. United States, CIT Consol. # 22-00017).
No lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade.
The classification of gun sight inserts that use tritium for powerless illumination in low light conditions are properly classified under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 9022 under the first General Rule of Interpretation (GRI), importer Trijicon argued in a Sept. 15 motion for summary judgment at the Court of International Trade (Trijicon v. United States, CIT # 22-00040).
The Commerce Department made multiple errors, including miscalculating benchmark data and the use of adverse inferences, in a countervailing duty review on multilayered wood flooring from China, Baroque Timber Industries said in its Sept. 15 reply at the Court of International Trade. Those alleged errors resulted in inaccurate CVD rates for Fine Furniture and other Chinese wood flooring exporters, Baroque said in a motion for judgment in March (see 2303100041) (Baroque Timber Industries (Zhongshan) Co. v. U.S., CIT # 22-00210).
The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Antidumping duty petitioner Association of American School Paper Supplies filed for and was granted dismissal of its lawsuit challenging a review of the AD order on lined paper products from India. The petitioner filed the suit to contest the Commerce Department's use of Afghanistan as a comparison market for India, arguing that the prices in Afghanistan were not representative and shouldn't have been the basis for normal value (see 2306060041). No reason was given for the case's dismissal, but all parties that had appeared in the action agreed to it (Association of American School Paper Suppliers v. United States, CIT # 23-00102).