A critical circumstances determination on imports of raw honey from Vietnam issued by the International Trade Commission should be remanded to the ITC due to a "flawed misreading of the statute," Sweet Harvest Foods and four other consolidated plaintiffs said in a May 16 reply brief at the Court of International Trade. In addition to misinterpreting the statute, Sweet Harvest said that the government's case endorses the ITC's use of outdated inventory data in assessing whether the entries were likely to “undermine seriously” an antidumping duty order to be issued in the future (Sweet Harvest Foods v. United States, CIT # 22-00188).
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Court of International Trade should not again remand an antidumping duty investigation on forged steel fluid end blocks from Germany because respondent Ellwood City Forge failed to exhaust its administrative remedies regarding the margin program before it filed suit at CIT, intervenor Edelstahl Siegen said in its May 15 remand comments (Ellwood City Forge v. U.S., CIT # 21-00077).
The Court of International Trade upheld the Commerce Department's final results in the antidumping duty administrative review on standard pipe from Turkey for 2020-21 after the issue in the case brought by exporter Borusan Mannesmann Boru Sanayi ve Ticaret was resolved by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The appellate court ruled that Commerce can legally deduct President Donald Trump's Section 232 steel and aluminum duties from an exporter's U.S. price in AD proceedings (see 2303150035). Borusan had raised the issue in a separate case at CIT (Borusan Mannesmann Boru Sanayi ve Ticaret v. United States, CIT # 23-00005).
The Court of International Trade granted the Commerce Department's voluntary request for remand for 120 days to review information submitted by antidumping duty respondent Officine Tecnosider on the agency's use of a quarterly cost methodology. Commerce asked for the remand since it said it couldn't find its analysis of the quarterly average prices of steel slab when prepping its reply brief to Officine Tecnosider in a case on the administrative review of the AD order on carbon and alloy steel cut-to-length plate from Italy for 2020-21 (see 2305080066) (Officine Tecnosider v. United States, CIT # 23-00001).
A supermodule for use in hydrogen fuel-cell power plants is correctly classified as a water gas generator, not as "parts" of electric generators, fuel cell manufacturer and generator importer HyAxium said in a May 15 response brief at the Court of International Trade. HyAxium asked the court to rule that the PC50 supermodules are properly classifiable under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 8405 and to dismiss the government's cross-motion for judgment (HyAxium v. U.S., CIT # 21-00057).
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Court of International Trade should stay a case challenging an Enforce and Protect Act finding of evasion while another related case goes through remand, DOJ argued in a May 12 motion. The court previously denied a joint motion to stay the case in September, finding that the claims in the EAPA case were "largely independent of Commerce's scope ruling" (see 2209270026) (Far East American v. U.S., CIT # 22-00213).
The U.S. voiced its opposition to countervailing duty respondent Tau-Ken Temir's bid to make a fourth correction to its opening brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The government said TKT's attempt to shoehorn arguments on the Commerce Department's new regulations concerning untimely submitted files violates the limitations on raising new authorities. If new authorities arise after a brief has been filed, the litigant must alert the court via a letter, the government said. TKT tried instead to insert a new argument in its corrections to its opening brief, sidestepping these limitations and "presenting a continually moving target" and impacting the government's ability to respond (Tau-Ken Temir v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 22-2204).
No good cause exists for the Court of International Trade to grant the Commerce Department another 30 days to file its remand results in an antidumping duty case on wind towers from Spain, exporter Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy said in a reply brief. Commerce filed its motion to extend one day before the parties' comments on the draft remand results were due, claiming that more time is needed for parties to comment and for the agency to analyze the comments (Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy v. United States, CIT # 21-00449).