The U.S. replaced its principal counsel in a series of two appeals in an Enforce and Protect Act case over whether Ascension Chemicals, UMD Solutions, Crude Chem Technology and Dr. Bronner's Magic Soaps transshipped Chinese xanthan gum through India to avoid antidumping duties. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit granted the government's unopposed motion to withdraw Kelly Krystyniak and replace her with Elisa Solomon. The Court of International Trade previously dismissed the action for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction since the entries at issue had been liquidated (see 2208180045) (All One God Faith v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-1078).
The Court of International Trade should halt proceedings in an antidumping duty case filed by HiSteel until after the deadline to appeal the trade court's recent decision in Stupp v. U.S., AD petitioner Nucor Tubular Products said in a March 9 motion. In Stupp, CIT said that the Commerce Department adequately addressed all questions raised by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on the use of the Cohen's d test as part of the differential pricing analysis to root out "masked" dumping (see 2302270049) -- a "virtually identical" issue to one argued in HiSteel's case, Nucor said (HiSteel Co. v. United States, CIT # 22-00142).
The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
A Court of International Trade ruling that allowed the Commerce Department to use the Cohen's d test as part of its differential pricing analysis to root out masked dumping (see 2302270049) should be given weight in a separate case contesting Commerce's final determination in the antidumping duty investigation on thermal paper from Germany, DOJ said in a March 7 filing at the Court of International Trade. Matra Americas and intervenor Koehler Paper argued in their September motion for judgment that Commerce’s use of the d test was flawed because it fails to take into account assumptions of sample size, distribution, and variance (see 2209160055) (Matra Americas v. United States, CIT # 21-00632).
The Commerce Department correctly applied adverse facts available to Brazilian honey producer Supermel during an antidumping duty investigation on raw honey from Brazil, defendant-intervenors the American Honey Producers Association and the Sioux Honey Association argued in a March 3 response brief at the Court of International Trade. Supermel's December motion for judgment should be tossed because the exporter failed to cooperate in the investigation and was correctly hit with AFA, the intervenors argued (Apiario Diamente Comercial Exportadora v. United States, CIT # 22-00185).
The Commerce Department failed to provide antidumping duty respondent CPW America Co. with a chance to comment on the agency's change in methodology, which resulted in a change from a zero percent dumping rate to one derived from total adverse facts available, CPW and Corinth Pipeworks Pipe Industry argued in a March 3 reply brief at the Court of International Trade. CPW said that Commerce illegally used AFA based on an "erroneous conclusion" that the respondent's reported costs were not reconciled to its normal books and records (Corinth Pipeworks Pipe Industry v. United States, CIT # 22-00063).
The following lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Court of International Trade should again remand the results of a countervailing duty investigation on carbon and alloy steel cut-to-length plate from South Korea to address allegations the Korean government provided off-peak electricity for less-than-adequate-remuneration, Nucor argued March 2 at the Court of International Trade. It also argued Commerce should reconsider whether to treat POSCO's affiliate, POSCO Plantec, as a cross-owned input supplier (Nucor v. U.S., CIT # 21-00182).
The Commerce Department correctly calculated production costs in its final determination in an antidumping duty investigation on raw honey from Argentina, DOJ said in its March 3 response to a motion for judgment at the Court of International Trade (Nexco v. United States, CIT # 22-00203).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on March 6 reactivated an appeal from U.S. Steel that had been on hold pending a bid to reconsider the underlying Court of International Trade decision (see 2211020073). CIT in February denied SeAH Steel's motion for reconsideration of its decision upholding the Commerce Department's use of the Cohen's d test as part of its differential pricing analysis to root out "masked" dumping (SeAH Steel v. U.S., Fed. Cir. # 23-1109).