The Commerce Department's discretion to decide whether to reopen the record on remand in antidumping duty proceedings "extends to placing surrogate value information on the record, with no restriction that such surrogate values can only be submitted to the record if strictly necessary," exporters Ningbo Master International Trade Co. and Guangzhou Jingye Machinery Co. argued. Submittting comments to the Court of International Trade, the exporters defended Commerce's decision to use Mexican International Labour Organization (ILO) data to value labor in the antidumping duty investigation on refillable stainless steel kegs from China (New American Keg v. United States, CIT # 20-00008).
Commerce's use of adverse inferences in selecting a countervailing duty rate in an administrative review on narrow woven ribbons with woven selvedge from China was correct and done using an established Commerce hierarchy, DOJ argued in its April 17 remand comments (Yama Ribbons and Bows v. U.S., CIT # 20-00059).
The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit stayed the briefing schedule in a countervailing duty case to consider a motion from Spanish olive growers to enlarge their reply brief by 1,500 words. The olive growers, led by Asociacion de Exportadores e Industrialies de Aceitunas de Mesa, asked for the additional words due to the "complexity of the issues presented in this appeal and the fact-specific nature of the arguments raised by the other parties." The case concerns whether the Commerce Department properly made its "substantially dependent finding" in the Spanish olives CVD investigation (see 2303280063) (Asociacion de Exportadores e Industriales de Aceitunas de Mesa v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-1162).
The Commerce Department double counted energy costs for Chinese xanthan gum producer Fufeng in an antidumping duty review on xanthan gum from China, and "compounded" the error by applying the incorrect rate to separate rate applicant, Meihua, the company said in an April 14 complaint at the Court of International Trade (Meihua Group International Trading (Hong Kong) v. U.S., CIT # 23-00069).
The Commerce Department incorrectly calculated subsidy rates and improperly applied adverse facts available despite the cooperation of respondent Jiangsu Alcha Aluminum, Alcha said it an April 14 motion for judgment at the Court of International Trade. Alcha is contesting Commerce's methodology in the agency's administrative review of a countervailing duty order on common alloy aluminum sheet from China (Jiangsu Alcha Aluminum Co. v. U.S., CIT #22-00290).
Shipping giant MSC Mediterranean Shipping Co. and others caused more than $182,000 in losses to logistics firm C.H. Robinson by mishandling five containers of grapes from Chile, C.H. Robinson said in an April 12 complaint filed in a Pennsylvania district court. The firm said MSC and marine terminal handlers Greenwich Terminals, Gloucester Terminals and Holt Logistics failed to impose "adequate procedures and fumigation facilities" to promptly fumigate the grapes (C.H. Robinson Co. v. MSC Mediterranean Shipping Co., E.D. Pa. # 2:23-01384).
The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Court of International Trade granted a group of Chinese exporters' motions to dismiss two cases contesting the Commerce Department's final results in the 2020 administrative review of the countervailing duty order on common alloy aluminum sheet from China. The case's complaints challenged the use of adverse facts available over the alleged use of China's Export Buyer's Credit Program and the benchmark for the sale of primary aluminum for less than adequate remuneration (see 2211080022). Daniel Cannistra, counsel for the plaintiffs, said it was decided that there was no more interest in the cases (Yinbang Clad Material Co. v. U.S., CIT # 22-00291, and Jiangsu Alcha Aluminum Co. v. U.S., CIT # 22-00292).
Pants designed to assist with incontinence should be classified under the duty-free Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 9817.00.96 as "Articles specially designed or adapted for the use of and benefit of the blind and other physically or mentally handicapped persons," Viecura said in an April 13 complaint at the Court of International Trade (Viecura v. U.S., CIT # 21-00154).