Plaintiffs Amsted Rail Co., ASF-K de Mexico, Strato and TTX will appeal a Court of International Trade decision dismissing their attorney misconduct suit for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, according to a Dec. 22 notice of appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Questions arose over whether the plaintiffs would actually appeal the case after the trade court rejected a proposed injunction that would bar ARC's former counsel and his firm from accessing confidential information in the underlying International Trade Commission proceeding (see 2212200033) (Amsted Rail Co. v. United States, CIT #22-00307).
The Court of International Trade in a Dec. 22 opinion upheld the Commerce Department's final results in the 2017-2018 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on hardwood plywood from China. In all, Judge Jennifer Choe-Groves looked at the six issues and sided with Commerce: (1) Commerce's calculation of normal value for respondent Linyi Chengen using its normal methodology and not its alternative input methodology; (2) Commerce's surrogate value data and calculation for Linyi Chengen's log inputs; (3) the agency's surrogate value calculation for labor; (4) whether a reply brief from the plaintiffs raises new arguments and has new information; (5) the surrogate value for Linyi Chengen's formaldehyde input; and (6) Commerce's selection of financial statements and calculation of surrogate financial ratios.
The Court of International Trade must not dismiss a case accusing importer Wanxiang America of gross negligence in its entries of wheel hub assemblies, radial ball and tapered roller bearings and universal joints from China, DOJ argued in a Dec. 21 opposition motion. The case addresses what DOJ calls "multiple grossly negligent and negligent violations" of Section 592 in connection with entries of wheel hub assemblies made between October 2007 and September 2012 that purportedly resulted in millions of dollars of lost duties for the government (United States v. Wanxiang America, CIT #22-00205).
Aspects Furniture International, plaintiff in an Enforce and Protect Act case, is waiving its arguments about CBP's lack of public summaries in an evasion proceeding, the plaintiff told the Court of International Trade in a Dec. 20 motion. Asking the court to partially waive its November order on the public summaries, Aspects said that, because CBP is reopening the record to allow revised public versions of certain documents to be submitted and requesting that the plaintiff resubmit most of the public version submissions made during the investigation, the court's order is no longer needed (Aspects Furniture International v. United States, CIT # 20-03824).
The Commerce Department must reconsider its scope ruling which placed importer Valeo North America's T-series aluminum sheet under the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on aluminum sheet from China, the Court of International Trade ruled in a Dec. 21 opinion. Judge Mark Barnett sent the ruling back to Commerce after finding that the agency did not properly support its inclusion of unregistered aluminum alloys to the scope with substantial evidence. While the judge did say that Commerce properly found that Valeo's sheet is a clad product, the agency must provide further explanation over the heat treatability of 3XXX-series alloys.
The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
The Court of International Trade in a confidential Dec. 20 opinion upheld the Commerce Department's remand results in a case on the 2017-18 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not assembled into modules, from China. In the remand results, Commerce dropped its use of partial adverse facts available over unreported factors of production data, reverting to neutral facts available, and changed how it values silver paste using Malaysian surrogate data (see 2207070047). However, the agency stuck by positions previously sent back by the trade court on how to value backsheets and ethyl vinyl acetate using surrogate data. In a letter to the litigants, Judge Claire Kelly said she wishes to issue a public version of the opinion on "or shortly after" Jan. 4 (Risen Energy Co. v. United States, CIT Consol. # 20-03743).
CBP has no authority to pay interest when refunding money voluntarily tendered with prior disclosures, DOJ argued in a Dec. 15 motion at the Court of International Trade. The government's motion was in response to phone case importer Otter Products' Sept. 12 motion for judgment, in which the company argued that 19 U.S.C. 1520(a)(3) "unambiguously authorizes" the treasury department to refund duties or other receipts whenever money is deposited in the Treasury (see 2209130029) (Otter Products v. United States, CIT #22-00033).
The Commerce Department illegally hit antidumping respondent Unicatch Industrial Co. with adverse facts available over the fact that the company did not submit a complete cost reconciliation, Unicatch and other appellants argued in a Dec. 19 opening brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Unicatch, along with TC International, Hor Liang Industrial Corp. and Romp Coil Nails Industries, argued that all the data needed to complete the cost reconciliation was on the record, meaning the respondent "could have easily completed the reconciliation in a manner required if it had realized that Commerce was not satisfied with its response" (Pro-Team Coil Nail Enterprise v. United States, Fed. Cir. # 22-2241).
Court of International Trade Judge Claire Kelly sustained the Commerce Department's remand results in a case concerning the antidumping duty investigation on fabricated structural steel from Mexico, in a Dec. 13 decision. Kelly found Commerce's changes and explanations reasonable and based on substantial evidence in accordance with law that complied with the court’s March remand order (see 2203310028).